J.S. Mill, Utilitarianism (1863)

PHIL 102, UBCSummer 2015

Christina Hendricks

Except parts noted otherwise, this presentation is licensed CC-BY 4.0

John Stuart Mill(1806-1873, England)

Mill “had a lifelong goal of reforming the world in the interest of human well-being” http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mill/

Groups on moral questions

http://is.gd/PHIL102Mill

Read the question assigned to your group (see instructions on the doc) and write down:

• Your own answers to the question

• What you think a utilitarian who agrees with Mill would say about it

When asking what is right/wrong morally, what to evaluate?

Person Action Consequences

• Intention• Motive• Habitual

disposition to act in some ways

• What kind of act is it?

• What was actually done?

• What results from the action?

Consequentialism

“whether an act is morally right depends only on consequences (as opposed to the …intrinsic nature of the act or anything that happens before the act).”

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on consequentialism: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/#ClaUti

Hedonistic consequentialism

• Value hedonism: “all and only pleasure is intrinsically valuable and all and only pain is intrinsically disvaluable.” -- Internet Encycl. of Philo: http://www.iep.utm.edu/hedonism/#SH1b

• Hedonistic consequentialism: determine moral value of consequences, and therefore of acts, by how much pleasure/pain produced

Utilitarianism, Chpt 1

“There ought either to be some one fundamental principle or law, at the root of all morality, or if there be several, there should be a determinate order of precedence among them…” (p. 1).

Why?What is that principle, for Mill?

Overview of Mill’s Utilitarianism

Oversimplified:we can judge the moral value of actions by the degree of happiness they tend to produce for the sentient creatures involved

Greatest Happiness Principle

“actions are [morally] right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, [morally] wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (2)

o “happiness” is defined in terms of pleasure and reduction or absence of pain

Support for GHP (more in Chpt. IV)

• “pleasure, and freedom from pain, are the only things desirable as ends” (2)

• Mill on the highest good (5)

• The “end of human action, is necessarily also the standard of morality” (5)o Why might this be the case?

LC poll

• Do you think utilitarianism, in what you know of it from the readings and class so far, is a useful way of determining which actions are right and wrong?

Different kinds of pleasures

Why does Mill distinguish between different kinds of pleasures, & what are they?

How do we know pleasures differ in kind, not just quantity?

Groups: • What is his answer on pp. 4-5?• What do you think of it?

Even if you could get the sensual pleasures fully satisfied, this wouldn’t be preferable to having less of the intellectual pleasures

o That’s what those who have experienced both say

Pleasure as only intrinsic value (p. 2, & Chpt 4)

Use happiness, defined in terms of pleasure, to evaluate consequences of acts

Greatest Happiness Principle (GHP)

Actual conseq. the act had?

What the person intended as

conseq.?

Usual conseq. for this kind of act?

Consequences for whom?

• Sentient beings (5)• Not the whole world for all

actions (6)

• Impartiality (5)

Role of motive

• Motive doesn’t matter to the morality of actions (6)

• Still, it would be good if we developed habitual motives of promoting happiness of others… (5-6)oHow might we do this?

Do we have to calculate consequences each time?

• No; we can use “subordinate principles” from the “fundamental principle” (GHP) (9)

• These are drawn from human experience of which kinds of actions tend to promote more/less pleasure & pain (8)

Pleasure as only intrinsic value

Use happiness, defined in terms of pleasure, to evaluate conseq. of acts

Greatest Happiness Principle (GHP)

Subordinate principles (moral rules) (8-9)

Act R/W?Act R/W? Act R/W? Act R/W?

GHP used to determine subordinate rules, decide between them if they conflict re: an action

Chpt 4: “proof” for GHP

GHP: “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (2).

Two premises supporting GHP:1. “happiness is … the only thing desirable, as an

end” [the only intrinsic good]; all else is desirable only as means to happiness (14)

2. if so, then we should use the production of happiness as the test for judging actions morally right/wrong (16)

(1) happiness is the only intrinsically good thing

(2) if happiness is only intrinsic good, use it to morally judge actions right or wrong

Greatest Happiness Principle (GHP)

Premises supporting (1) (groups & on board)

(2) Mostly just assumed

Argument for (1)1. “happiness is … the only thing desirable, as

an end” [the only intrinsic good]; all else is desirable only as means to happiness (14)

Groups: • Read 3rd paragraph of Chpt IV, p. 14• outline the argument and discuss any

criticisms you have of ito Write in the section on “outlining and

commenting on an argument from Chpt IV,” on this document: http://is.gd/PHIL102Mill

Overall argument for GHP

My outline of this: written on the board…

Premise (c) on boardWhat could it mean to say things can be desired as a means to happiness or as part of happiness?

Virtudes y Abraham, Flickr photo shared byCarmen Escobar Carrio, licensed CC BY 2.0

Parliament Ottawa, Wikimedia Commons, edited by Jeffrey Nichols from original by Steven W Dengler, licensed CC BY SA 3.0

Premise (d) on board

H1 H2 H3

Individual happiness

P1 P2 P3

Individual persons

Aggregate of persons

Arrows = desire

Aggregate happiness/ ”general happiness”

(1) happiness is the only intrinsically good thing

(2) if happiness is only intrinsic good, use it to morally judge actions right or wrong

Greatest Happiness Principle (GHP)

Premises a, b, c,d (on board) supporting (1)

(2) Mostly just assumedpp. 1, 5, 16

Chpt V: Utilitarianism & Justice

Two questions addressed in this chapter:

1. What differentiates justice from the rest of morality?

2. Would utilitarianism allow people to act unjustly if that would promote more happiness in a group overall?

o Examples? No!

Some new terms

Morally obligatory/requiredWhat must be done

Morally permissible/optionalWhat can be done

Morally prohibitedWhat must not be done

Supererogatory praiseworthy but

optional

• What would promote general happiness, that ppl should be compelled to do or avoid (obligatory or prohibited)

• What ppl should be compelled to do/avoid depends on utility

• What would promote happiness for self or group that ppl should not be compelled to do or avoid

• What we like or dislike ppl to do, but not that they must do them (not morally obligatory or prohibited)

• Examples?

Morality/duty Prudence/expedience

Morality

• Duties of perfect obligation

• Connected to one or more rights

• What counts as a right depends on utility

• Justice/rights focus on security: “the most vital of all interests” (21)

• Duties of imperfect obligation

• Not connected to rights

• Example: generosity

Justice Rest of morality

Must we maximize happiness?

For Mill, is it morally required to produce as much happiness as possible, in all our actions?

No!Supererogatory (20)

So if we don’t we’re morally wrong?

Second question this chapter answers

Would utilitarianism allow people to act unjustly if that would promote more happiness in a group overall?

How would Mill respond, and why?

Still…

Are there exceptions to rules of justice?• Yes and no… (22)

LC poll

• Now that we’ve finished talking about it, do you think Mill’s version of utilitarianism is a useful way to determine what’s morally right/wrong?

• Why/why not?• Do you have any questions about it

left over?

Act vs Rule utilitarianism

A distinction that didn’t exist when Mill was writing

• AU: moral value of acts judged by utility of consequences of those (kinds of) acts

• RU: moral value of acts judged by whether they follow rules; rules judged by utility of their consequences if generally accepted and/or followed

Act utilitarianism

Rule utilitarianism

Principle of utility (e.g., Mill’s GHP)

Act R/W?

Principle of utility (e.g., Mill’s GHP)

Act R/W? Act R/W? Rules with high acceptance and/or obedience utility

Act R/W? Act R/W? Act R/W?

Where does Mill’s view fit?