[2.6.] Utilitarianism.

 

In general, utilitarianism is the normative theory according to which morally right actions are those that “produce the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of beings” (Pence p.9). But different utilitarians have disagreed about what counts as a good consequence of an action...

 

classical utilitarianism (df.):  the right thing to do in any situation is whatever will increase the overall amount of happiness in the world and decrease the amount of suffering.

·         This is how Utilitarians in the 19^th century (including Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill) stated the theory.

 

These days, utilitarians are likely to emphasize well-being or making people better off rather than happiness:

 

modern utilitarianism (df.):  the right thing to do in any situation is whatever will increase the overall amount of well-being in the world.

 

Every version of utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism:

 

consequentialism (df.): a normative theory that judges whether an action is moral or immoral based only its consequences/effects; nothing else about the action is morally relevant.

 

Consequentialism is one main tradition within normative ethics. Another main tradition is

 

deontology (df.): the tradition of normative ethics that focuses on duty, holding that there are some actions that you have a duty to perform and some you have a duty not to perform, regardless of the consequences (from Greek “deon”, meaning duty).

·         We have already discussed one form of deontology: the ethical theory of Kant.

 

Discussion: how would a utilitarian approach the case of Mr. Jones?

 

In the case of Mr. Jones, a utilitarian will weigh the consequences of telling the truth against the consequences of lying and then ask: which option has the better overall consequences?

 

consequences of telling the truth

consequences of lying

Mr. Jones, who is going to die anyway, will have an even more agonizing death if he knows that months earlier there was a small chance that he could have been treated and saved.   Sam will suffer: he will be sued and perhaps lose his license to practice medicine. This will lead to bad consequences for him, his family, and the hospital staff.   Mr. Jones will sue, and he (in the short term) and his family (in the long term) will be better off because of the money they will get, perhaps even being able to send his grandkids to college.

Mr. Jones will have a less agonizing death.         Sam’s career will not suffer; he, his family and the hospital will be better off.       The Joneses will have less money than otherwise (however, they won’t know that they have less money than they could have had, so they won’t suffer the negative psychological consequences of such knowledge).

 

A utilitarian will weigh the good consequences against the bad consequences and base her moral judgment on which option, lying or telling the truth, has the better outcome, either in terms of greater happiness (for a classical utilitarian) or greater well-being (for a modern utilitarian).

 

 

 

Stopping point for Wednesday January 14. For next time, review today’s lecture notes, finish reading ch.1 of Pence (pp.14-20), and review any notes you have on Aristotle’s ethics from Intro to Philosophy or Ancient Philosophy.