UtilitarianismAn Introduction to the Moral

Theories of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill

Ethical Judgments

Ethical philosophy differs from the sciences because it is normative or prescriptive, rather than descriptive.

In other words, ethics tell us how we ought to act or what we should do, while the sciences are more likely to observe how things are in nature or society.

Making Ethical Judgments

Areas of Emphasis in Making Moral Judgments

Purpose or Motive

Act, Rule, or Maxim

Results or Consequences

Making Ethical Judgments in Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism says that the Result or the Consequence of an Act is the real measure of whether it is good or bad.

This theory emphasizes Ends over Means.

Theories, like this one, that emphasize the results or consequences are called teleological or consequentialist.

Jeremy Bentham

Bentham’s Formulation of Utilitarianism

Man is under two great masters, pain and pleasure.

The great good that we should seek is happiness. (a hedonistic perspective)

Those actions whose results increase happiness or diminish pain are good. They have “utility.”

Jeremy Bentham’s Hedonistic Calculus

In determining the quantity of happiness that might be produced by an action, we evaluate the possible consequences by applying several values:

Intensity, duration, certainty or uncertainty, propinquity or remoteness, fecundity, purity, and extent.

Four Theses of Utilitarianism Consequentialism: The rightness of actions is

determined solely by their consequences. Hedonism: Utility is the degree to which an act

produces pleasure. Hedonism is the thesis that pleasure or happiness is the good that we seek and that we should seek.

Maximalism: A right action produces the greatest good consequences and the least bad.

Universalism: The consequences to be considered are those of everyone affected, and everyone equally.

Two Formulations of Utilitarian Theory

Principle of Utility: The best action is that which produces the greatest happiness and/or reduces pain.

Greatest Happiness: We ought to do that which produces the greatest happiness and least pain for the greatest number of people.

Two Types of Utilitarianism Rule: An action is right

if and only if it conforms to a set of rules the general acceptance of which would produce the greatest balance of pleasure over pain for the greatest number. (John Stuart Mill)

Act: An Action is right if and only if it produces the greatest balance of pleasure over pain for the greatest number. (Jeremy Bentham)

Application of Utilitarian Theory A) You attempt to

help an elderly man across the street. He gets across safely.

Conclusion: the Act was a good act.

B) You attempt to help an elderly man across the street. You stumble as you go, he is knocked into the path of a car, and is hurt.

Conclusion: The Act was a bad act.

Application of Utilitarian Theory

If you can use eighty soldiers as a decoy in war, and thereby attack an enemy force and kill several hundred enemy soldiers, that is a morally good choice even though the eighty might be lost.

If lying or stealing will actually bring about more happiness and/or reduce pain, Act Utilitarianism says we should lie and steal in those cases.

Application of Utilitarian TheoryActual Cases

The decision at Coventry during WWII. The decision was made not to inform the town

that they would be bombed. The Ford Pinto case: A defective vehicle

would sometimes explode when hit. The model was not recalled and repaired by Ford

because they felt it was cheaper to pay the liability suits than to recall and repair all the defective cars.

Criticisms of Bentham’s theoryBentham’s theory could mean that if 10 people would be happy watching a man being eaten by wild dogs, it would be a morally good thing for the 10 men to kidnap someone (especially someone whose death would not cause grief to many others) and throw the man into a cage of wild, hungry dogs.

John Stuart Mill’s Adjustments to Utilitarianism

Mill argues that we must consider the quality of the happiness, not merely the quantity.

For example, some might find happiness with a pitcher of beer and a pizza. Others may find happiness watching a fine Shakespearean play. The quality of happiness is greater with the latter.

Mill’s Quality Arguments

“It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides.”

Mill’s Quality Arguments

“As between his own happiness and that of others, utilitarianism requires him to be as strictly impartial as a disinterested and benevolent spectator. In the golden rule of Jesus of Nazareth, we read the complete spirit of the ethics of utility. ‘To do as you would be done by,’ and ‘to love your neighbor as yourself,’ constitute the ideal perfection of utilitarian morality.”

Criticisms of UtilitarianismIf I am to bring the greatest happiness to the greatest number, not putting my own happiness above others, that may lead to a dilemma. I live in a neighborhood where 83% of my neighbors use drugs. I could make them most happy by helping supply them with cheap drugs, but I feel uncomfortable doing that. What should a utilitarian do?

Criticisms of Utilitarianism Bernard Williams criticizes the implied

“doctrine of negative responsibility” in Utilitarianism. For example, a thug breaks into my home and holds six people hostage, telling us he will kill all of us. “However,” the thug says, “if you will kill two of your family, I will let you and the other three live.”

With Utilitarianism, the good thing to do is to kill two members of my family.

Criticisms of Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism plays fast and loose with God’s commandments. If lying, stealing, or killing could lead to an increase of happiness for the greatest number, we are told we should lie, steal or kill. Isn’t that a rejection of God’s commands?

Mill’s Answer to the “Godless Theory” Criticism What is the nature of God?

Does God make arbitrary rules just to see if we will obey?

Does God make rules that He knows will lead to our happiness?

If the latter statement is true, doesn’t it make sense God would want us to use our God-given reason to look at the situation?

Mill’s Answer to the “Godless Theory” Criticism

“If it be a true belief that God desires, above all things, the happiness of his creatures, and that this was his purpose in their creation, utility is not a godless doctrine, but more profoundly religious than any other. . . . .whatever God has though fit to reveal on the subject of morals must fulfill the requirements of utility in a supreme degree.”

A Second Criticism of Utilitarianism

If one must decide the probable outcome of an act before knowing whether it is good or bad, how can children learn to evaluate acts, since they know so little of what consequences might arise from their actions?

Mill’s “Rule” Utilitarianism“ . . . Mankind must by this time have acquired positive beliefs as to the effects of some actions on their happiness; and the beliefs which have thus come down are the rules of morality for the multitude, and for the philosopher until he has succeeded in finding better.” Mill concludes, however, that we should always seek improvements.

Rights and Utilitarianism

Many philosophers hold that we have certain rights, either from God, nature, or from a social contract

Can the idea of rights be made compatible with Utilitarianism?

If ignoring rights brings about more happiness to the greatest number, should we ignore so-called rights?

Mill’s rule-based view in On Liberty; having a right to liberty will bring the greatest happiness

Consequences of Unethical Practices

Baucus & Baucus (2000) Singled out 67 companies out of the Fortune 500

that had at least one illegal act – ex: antitrust, product liabilities, discrimination

Performance of the convicted firms were compared to unconvicted firms (five year after the fraud was committed)

Convicted firms experienced significantly lower return on sales (three year lag)

Multiple convictions are more disastrous Unethical activities can affect long term

performance