UTILITARIANISM / CONSEQUENTIALISM

Rels 300 / Nurs 330

10 September 2015

Group #1Burns, LauraStevenson, MasonFraser, KaylaMacDonald, MaryHingston, Olivia

Group #2Smith, ShannaleeGougeon, FelipeMacDougall, AbbeyAllen, JasmineGillis, CarlyJohnson, Christeen

Group #3Thompson, MaryLivingstone, AnnieMaciel, AnalieseSmith, JenniferBerry, RachelGillis, Erin

Group #4Mattie, JoniVisentin, ChristinaBond, ShyaMcLellan, BaileyBriere, TessGillis, Heather

Group #5Piché, AngelaBaisley, AshleyBurke, CarrieMurphy, JillianCorcoran, CourtneyGillis, Kenzie

Group #6Schofield, KatelynBernas, AlexMyers, JamieDenaro, ChelseaCroft, LaurenSmith, Maggie

Group #7Taylor, EmmaCarroll, KathleenPoirier, BaillieFesteryga, DeirdreDeCoste, VictoriaHughes, Tanner

Group #8Williams, KailynClarke, LaurenRedden, JulieMombourquette, SDouglas, PattiHum, Katherine

Group #9Davis, SavannahSavary, MurphyCunningham, CassyMacAulay, AlyssaDowney, Erica

UNIT 1 GROUPS MORAL THEORY9 to 30 September

Group #10Downing, AllisonSibley, NicoleMacDonald, BrittanyRoach, ChristianEisan, Brianna

3

Sharing in Groups

What was the most important thing you did this past summer?

Share something about yourself that few class-mates would know about you.

What do you want to be doing five years from now?

What is one goal you have for this year?

300/330 appleby

300/330 appleby 4

QUIZ #1UTILITARIANISM / CONSEQUENTIALISM

10 September 2015

300/330 appleby 5

Consequentialism (aka, utilitarianism)

Decide what action to take on the basis of what the results or consequences of the action will be.

List the good consequences, then the bad consequences of each possible action;

then choose the one with the most good consequences.

Best consequences for me = ETHICAL EGOISMBest consequences for others = ETHICAL ALTRUISMBest consequences for all involved = UTILITARIANISM

300/330 appleby 6

UTILITARIANISM (aka consequentialism)

An act is moral if it brings more good consequences than bad ones.

Utilitarianism is concerned with goals, purposes, ends, results and consequences

goals or ends evaluated are pleasure or overall happiness, and pain or overall unhappiness

300/330 appleby 7

Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)

English philosopher concerned with social reform•proposed utilitarian calculus of pleasures for evaluating proposals for social reform

•what social reforms would truly benefit the largest number of people in society [and not just the wealthy or privileged]?

•Right actions = more pleasure than pain•Wrong actions = more pain than pleasure

300/330 appleby 8

Bentham’s “radical egalitarianism”• Calculate the sum of all of the values and potential

pleasure for a potential action, taking into consideration all people affected

• Calculate the sum of pain and pleasure for an alternative potential action, taking into consideration all people affected

• Bentham called this the Hedonic Calculus

“We are to do the thing that will provide the greatest amount of pleasure and the least amount of pain to

the greatest number of people” (p.6)

300/330 appleby 9

• All pleasures count equally

“Hockey is as good as opera” (p.6)• Everyone counts equally; no person gets preferential consideration

The Prime Minister’s pleasure is no more important than the poorest citizen’s

• All pains must be recognized and considered

Every being with a capacity for suffering must be included in the calculation.

• Possibly including animals in the calculus

300/330 appleby 10

Criticisms levelled againstBentham’s Utilitarianism

1. Some pleasures should count for more than others.

2. The pleasures and privations of some should count for more than others.

3. Why should pleasure be the primary value? Does pleasure have intrinsic value that outweighs values such as love or justice?

4. How can pleasures and pains be calculated in a manner that can be accurately weighed?

11

John Stuart Mill (1803-1873)

Proposed calculation of utility based on happiness rather than pleasure: Happiness = pleasure +

absence of pain Unhappiness = pain +

absence of pleasureHappiness has intrinsic

value; other values promote or undermine happiness

+ not all goods are equal some are qualitatively

more significant or preferable

e.g., intellectual & aesthetic pleasures are more valuable than the pleasures of bodily needs and desires

300/330 appleby

12

Greatest Happiness Principle

Mill says happiness = the supreme principle of morality

• Morally right actions promote happiness• Morally wrong actions lead to unhappiness (or pain,

or privation of pleasure)The happiness of all people is to be considered equallyMill is still concerned to promote the greatest good for

the greatest number of peopleNo persons are more important than others; no special

relationships of love or obligation influence the calculation

300/330 appleby

300/330 appleby 13

“Do as you would be done by … love your neighbour as yourself.”

“The happiness which forms the Utilitarian standard of what is right in conduct, is not the agent’s [or

individual’s] own happiness, but … the happiness of every individual, as nearly as possible in harmony with

the interest [or good] of the whole.”

The goal of an agent’s good [or right] conduct or moral behaviour is measured by the well-being [or good] of the whole, not just you as an individual.

• Not just a self-centred analysis or goal

300/330 appleby 14

“The Subjection Of Women” (1869)

Mill was concerned with both social arrangements and legal status:• He wrote that the legal subordination of women to men is

wrong; the patriarchal family structure in which women are subordinate to their husbands is “patently unjust”• women are unjustly restricted in their development and

spheres of action; men may become “brutal” in their behaviour toward their wives and children

• There is NO “natural order” of dominance• Women are fully capable of equality with men

Mill similarly argued against slavery which was still promoted by some

300/330 appleby 15

Criticisms leveled against Mill’s Utilitarianism

1. Difficult to assess qualitative values of happiness

2. What is the standard by which pleasures are measured?

• By what standard would pizza, beer & hockey be measured as less valuable than a gourmet meal, wine and Shakespeare? (p.8)

3. Who determines what counts as “higher” and “lower” pleasures?

4. Is it likely that everyone would agree on these matters?

300/330 appleby 16

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-24032031

BBC NewsWALES10 September 2013

Organ donation: Presumed consent to start in December 2015

People in Wales will be presumed to have agreed for their organs to be donated after death from December 2015.

17

An act is moral if it brings more good consequences than bad ones.

What is the action to be evaluated?

What would be the good consequences?

How certain are the good consequences?

What would be the bad consequences?

How likely is it that they would occur?

How extensive are the bad consequences?

Are there alternatives?

Right actions = more pleasure

than pain

Wrong actions = more pain than

pleasure

The happiness of all people is to be

considered equally

300/330 appleby

300/330 appleby 18

Sub-categories: 1. ACT UTILITARIANISM

A person ought to act so as to produce the greatest balance of good over evil, everyone considered.

For each action:• weigh the interests of all involved with no preferences:

• interests of oneself and others – strangers and loved ones alike and equal

• no particular obligations, e.g. of parents to children• net balance of good over evil = utility• Consistent with the Golden Rule – treat others as you

would have them treat you• No action is inherently good or evil (apart from its

consequences)

300/330 appleby 19

Sub-categories:2. RULE UTILITARIANISM

A person ought to act according to the RULE that, if generally followed, would produce the greatest balance of

good over evil, everyone considered.

Which rules maximize utility, not just in this one instance, but in all similar situations and cases where a decision must be made?

Right actions satisfy moral rules

300/330 appleby 20

Utilitarianism checklist:

What is the action to be evaluated?No action is intrinsically right or wrong

What would be the good consequences?How certain are the good consequences?

What would be the bad consequences?How likely is it that they would occur?How extensive are the bad consequences?

Are there alternative possible actions?Perform same calculation for these actions

300/330 appleby 21

Make a decision:

What action will minimize harm and maximize benefit for the greatest number of people?

300/330 appleby 22

Limitations & Strengths

Limitations

1. How do you determine the right action when 2 or more consequences have no commonalities or standard for comparison, e.g., health or education, freedom or security

2. It is always impossible to foresee ALL of the possible consequences

3. If happiness is the only intrinsic value, then values such as justice, dignity & rights have value only as foundations for happiness

300/330 appleby 23

Limitations & StrengthsStrengths

1. Consequences ARE important in making choices

2. Preferential concern or personal obligations can mask the well-being of others; sometimes difficult allocation decisions must be made

3. Non-human (or “sub-human”) well-being may indeed be a component of happiness

300/330 appleby 24

August 26, 2012

BERLIN -- A German court has ruled that circumcising young boys on religious grounds amounts to bodily harm even if parents consent to the procedure.

Cologne state court said the child's right to physical integrity trumps freedom of religion and parents' rights…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/26/german-court-circumcision_n_1628405.html

300/330 appleby 25

The president of Germany's Central Council of Jews, Dieter Graumann, called the ruling "unprecedented and insensitive," urging the country's parliament to clarify the legal situation "to protect religious freedom against attacks.“

• Graumann said the circumcision of newborn Jews has been practiced for thousands of years and "every country in the world respects this religious right."

Muslims also circumcise young boys, while many parents request it on health grounds.

• http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/26/german-court-circumcision_n_1628405.html

300/330 appleby 26

Perform a utilitarian calculation forinfant male circumcision

• Potential good consequences or benefits

• Potential bad consequences, risks or harms

• How certain are the potential good or bad consequences?

• How important, serious or extensive are the potential good or bad consequences?

• Who will reap the potential good benefits?

• Who will suffer the potential bad consequences?

• Are there alternative actions that should be considered?

300/330 appleby 27

Make your decision

Should infant males be routinely circumcised?

• Which policy will be likely to minimize harm and maximize benefit for the greatest number of people?

300/330 appleby 28

According to Utilitarianism:• There is no “inherently right” answer to the question of

circumcision outside of particular situations and contexts

The right thing to do may differ

• in different circumstances

• for different people

• at different times and locations

300/330 appleby 29

• No answer or action is “inherently right”• What does “inherently” mean in this case?• In and of itself, the action of surgically removing a fold of skin at the

tip of the penis is neither an ethical action nor an unethical action• No person has a universal DUTY to be circumcised or to perform

circumcisions