Utilitarianism

• Movie Clips

• Bentham and Mill –Principle of Utility–Rule Utilitarianism

• Case Studies and Discussion

PG-13 Strong Language

Thin Red Line

• Nick Nolte…how many of your men are you willing to risk?

Counting Costs &Making Tough Calls

Military decision-making, and public policy generally (including economic policy), frequently make use of “outcomes-based” reasoning

The “right” decision, action, or policy is often defined as the one that optimizes the balance of benefits over harms for all affected. For example:

President Truman’s decision to use nuclear force on Hiroshima

Gen. Omar Bradley at St. Lo Churchill and the Bombing of Coventry “Lifeboat” dilemmas “Medical triage” decisions

Rules of Engagement

Your thoughts…

Utilitarianism

The “utility” (usefulness or moral rightness) of a policy is measured by its tendency to promote the “good” (or to prevent harm).

Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) :“The good” is simply pleasure

John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) : “The good” is happiness - a more complex notion,

achieved by living a principled and prudent life”

Bentham and Mills were reformers concerned with political reform and franchising the populace

Bentham and Mills were reformers concerned with political reform and franchising the populace

Bentham’s “Act” Utilitarianism• “Nature has placed mankind under the governancy of

two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do.”

• “The principle of utility . . . Is that principle which approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever according to the tendency which it appears to have to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question”

• “By utility is meant that property in any object, whereby it tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness, or to prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil, or unhappiness. . .”

Bentham’s “Hedonistic Calculus”Prin of Morals & Legislation, Ch IV

Bentham envisioned an actual calculus of pain and pleasure, something like the following:

For every act (or choice), x (where x’s effects are a function of time), there is a quantity U(x), the net utility of X for time t, such that

Bentham tried to provide a scientific standard that anyone could apply in determining right from wrong…

…as opposed to subjective, dogmatic or “intuitive” ideas of good.

Bentham tried to provide a scientific standard that anyone could apply in determining right from wrong…

…as opposed to subjective, dogmatic or “intuitive” ideas of good.

Net Utility

For every human action, X, there is a quantity u(X) associated with that action, called the “net utility” of that act.

– This net utility of X is the sum of all the benefits (B) minus the harms (H) of the action X

The net utility of X must be calculated for all individuals, i, affected by X; thus:

u (X) = B(x) - H(x), for all i

An action is “morally right” if it has a higher net utility than any alternative.

This is why Navy Options must take Calculus…This is why Navy Options must take Calculus…

Early Criticisms of Bentham’s Approach

• Hedonism – a moral theory “fit for swine”

• Atheistic – leaves out God(and by extension, any higher-order moral considerations)

• Promotes selfishness – calculus of pure self-interest

Bentham’s rebuttal: Vulgar or not, nature has placed us under two masters, pleasure and pain - there is no other standard

Those who walk away…

• Why did they walk?• Would you stay or

would you walk away?

• …or would you try and change it?– What important values

appear to be missing in the Utilitarian calculus?

LeGuin won the Hugo Award for Best Short Story in 1974LeGuin won the Hugo Award for Best Short Story in 1974

Modern Criticisms

• Quantification and measurability of “the good”• Incommensurate notions of “the good”• Ignores other, morally relevant considerations

– Human Rights– Justice– Distribution of “the good”

• Difficult and often inconsistent in practice to solve for U(x) and maximize this variable

• No supererogation– No value in performing more than required

by duty

John Stuart Mill’s Revisions: Utilitarianism

• Elevate the “Doctrine of the Swine” – – Pleasures of the intellect, not the flesh– Qualitatively better, not quantitatively

• “Happiness” is NOT simply equivalent to pleasure– “lower quality pleasures”

• shared with other animals – e.g., food, sex

– “higher quality pleasures,” • uniquely human, involving our so-called higher faculties

“It is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool or a pig satisfied.”“It is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool or a pig satisfied.”

Utilitarianism is NOT equivalent to selfishness. Mill writes:“. . .between his own happiness and that of another, utilitarianism

requires that one be strictly impartial as a disinterested and benevolent spectator.”

“…not the agent’s own happiness but that of all concerned.”

Notions like “rights” and “justice” are merely “rules of thumb” that represent underlying calculations of overall utility (rule utilitarianism)

Is this what Mill really meant?Is this what Mill really meant?

John Stuart Mill’s Revisions: Utilitarianism (Cont)

The Principle of Utility

(or Principle of Greatest Happiness) says:

“The greatest happiness of all of those whose interest is in question, is the right and proper, and universally desirable, end of human action.”

The greatest good for the greatest numberThe greatest good for the greatest number

The Principle of Utility and the Nautical Almanac - Mills

“Nobody argues that the art of navigation is not founded on astronomy because sailors cannot wait to calculate the Nautical Almanac. Being rational creatures, they go to sea with it ready calculated;”

“…and all rational creatures go out upon the sea of life with their minds made up on the common questions of right and wrong, as well as on many of the far more difficult questions of wise and foolish.

- John Stuart Mill -

…stay with me… Mill – 147Intro - 139

The “Moral Almanac”

• We shouldn’t have to derive right and wrong in specific instances each time we face a dilemma, directly from the basic rules of morality

• Like the Nautical Almanac, we have a “moral almanac”: i.e., the rules, laws, religious teachings, moral traditions, and customs of the past– all of which reflect accumulated human wisdom about

the kinds of actions and policies that tend to promote utility

…Our moral “rules of thumb”…Our moral “rules of thumb” Mill – 147Intro - 139

The Principle of Utility and

The Moral Almanac

“Principle of Utility” performs three vital functions:

1) Explains the foundations, and offers justification, for our moral rules, laws, and customs, or

2) Exposes the inadequacy of unjust laws or customs that do NOT promote utility; and

3) Offers us a means for resolving conflicts between rules and laws, or deciding vexing cases on which traditional moral rules and laws are silent

Do no harm Don’t lie

Help those in needTreat as equals

Don’t Steal Respect life

Protect

the innocent Mill – 147

Intro - 139

Act vs Rule Utilitarianism

• Assesses the consequences of our actions– Is there justification in harming

someone?

• An act is right if, and only if, it results in as much good as any available alternative

• Assess the consequences of following particular rules:– Is there justification in harming

a small number of people in order to save a larger number?

• An act is right if, and only if, it is required by a rule that is itself a member of a set of rules, whose acceptance will lead to greater utility for society than any other available alternative.

Act Utilitarianism Rule Utilitarianism

Rule Utilitarinanism

• Set of utility-maximizing rules– Simple rules of thumb you follow unless there is a

conflict between them– ““Help those in need”Help those in need”

• Resolve conflict between the rules– ““Keep your promises”Keep your promises” vs “Help those in need”“Help those in need”

e.g., What if you see someone in an emergency on your way to a meeting?What if you see someone in an emergency on your way to a meeting?

• Remainder rule:– Do what your best judgment deems to be the ACT that

will maximize utility

So how do you measure good/bad consequences?

• The principle of utility (or Principle of Greatest Happiness) says:– “The greatest happiness of all of those whose

interest is in question, is the right and proper, and universally desirable, end of human action.”

• Happiness can then be looked at either long term or short term, physical pleasure or intellectual happiness

• Should allow everyone affected by the act to “get a vote”

• We already reason like this in many cases

• Act Utilitarian: The principle should be applied to particular acts in particular circumstances

  • Rule Utilitarian: An action is right if it conforms to a rule of conduct

that has been validated by the principle of utility 

Your Thoughts?

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF UTILITARIANISM?• IS IT LOGICAL? INTUITIVE? • IS THIS A MORAL THEORY YOU CAN USE TO

MAKE DECISIONS?– Is pleasure vs pain the right metric?

• WHAT IS UTILITARIAN REASONING BASED ON?– CONSEQUENCES – (OUTCOMES) – TELEOLOGICAL

1. RIGHT/WRONG DETERMINED BY GOOD/BAD OUTCOME2. PLEASURE (+) PAIN (-) 3. HUMAN FLOURISHING (+) SUFFERING (-)

Evaluating Actions by Their Consequences

(Examples from the trivial to the life determining)

Example: (Not a deep moral issue)Do I eat the donut this morning?

Considerations:– Long term – at least 500 calories = ¼ pound to my body weight – Short term pleasure – burst of sugar in my mouth– Will make me sleepy after about 45 min.– I love donuts, they make me happy– My heart condition– Other consequences to consider?

Little More Complex…EXAMPLE: CALCULATING THE CONSEQUENCES Should I stay in the Navy or Marine Corps after obligated service? How do I decide?

One way is to look at consequencesconsequences and measure happinessmeasure happiness.stay in navy leave

navyJob security (+1000) Need to pay for college (-500)Get to serve country (+200) Will miss the camaraderie (-

100)Will have obligated service (-300) Will not have to deploy

(+600)Travel around world (+100)Variety of duty (+100)Have to leave home (-600)

Weighted Values: Commonly Accepted Decision-Making ProcessWeighted Values: Commonly Accepted Decision-Making Process

How would a Utilitarian divide P300?

Option P A B C

Mona P100 P150 P300

Larry P100 P100 P0

Cora P100 P50 P0

Option P A B C

Mona P100 P150 P300

Larry P100 P100 P0

Cora P100 P50 P0

Triage

Medical Triage Example

1) Will die without extraordinary

measures

2) Will live---don’t treat

now

3) Might save if they get medical

attention

Is this a “fair” concept?• How do we morally justify letting people die without

medical attention? Shouldn’t we be trying to save every human life?

• How would you feel if you woke up on tent #1?

• How do we morally explain to the patient in tent #1 they will not see a doctor?

Triage – Last Look

Live or Let Die?You are a battlefield surgeon, and one of the wounded has been in a coma for several days, and the doctors believe has brain damage and are not certain he will recover. A new group of badly wounded arrive in need of immediate surgery. You determine that they need four different organs to live, and there are four surgeons standing by for your decision.

– If you take the four organs from the comatose soldier, you can save four people. (assume surgeries will be successful)

Questions on the Case – What kind of argument can you make for taking his

organs?– What kind of argument can you make for not

taking his organs, and letting the other four die?– What is the morally right thing to do?– What kind of moral reasoning did you use?

Closing the Hatch

Crimson Tide

Questions on Closing the Hatch… • Would you give the order to close the

hatch?• What moral reasoning did you use?

But…if your principle as CO is protect the lives of your men/women, then how do you justify giving the order to intentionally kill one of your men?

– Will this moral reasoning work in all situations?

– How do you deal with your moral conscience after closing the hatch?

The Moral Point

• What is the difference between the case “Live and Let Die” and “Closing the Hatch”?– In the case of the battlefield surgeon, you

were willing to let all five die, rather than take the life of one, and in the Crimson Tide case, you were willing to take the lives of 3 to save 140…

– Why?

• Is it just Math: ….saving 140 vs saving 4? ….Is that how we make decisions?

• How can we explain the different moral How can we explain the different moral answers between the two cases?answers between the two cases?

Problems and PitfallsLead in to Kantian Ethics…

• Familiar Soviet proverb: “If you want to make an omelet, you have to break a few eggs” – “Do the ends justify the means?”

• Are the requirements of justice and protections of human rights negotiable at the “bottom line?”– See Ford Pinto…

Criticisms• Tyranny of the masses

– Cannibalism makes all but one person happy

• Ability to predict the future– Forecast the consequences or the “ends”

• Which is fairer?– Equal opportunity or equal happiness?

• $300 split 3 ways…

– Are numbers the best metric?• 1 life for 1? …for 2?,,,for 5?...for 100?

Teleological Ethics……Consequential Principles

Utilitarian Morality: • An act is good/bad, right/wrong, depending on the

consequences or ends produced by that act

– If the consequences are good, the act is good.

– If the consequences are bad, the act is bad.

• Utilitarianism:– Judges the act, not the person– Does not consider intentions or motive– So, good intentions could produce a “bad” act– And “bad” people (with bad intentions) can produce a good

act

So much for good intent!So much for good intent!

More Thoughts…

• Isn’t the military the ultimate Utilitarian?– We are willing to sacrifice

soldiers to achieve our desired end state?

• Don’t Utilitarians use some Kantian ethics? …They have good intent!

• Patriot Act?

• Value of the individual– Equal claim to triage

treatment?

Haqlaniyah, Al Anbar, Iraq (Dec. 19, 2006) - Marines assigned to 2nd Battalion, 3rd Marines (2/3) amuse Iraqi children while on patrol through the city of Haqlaniyah, during Maritime Security Operations (MSO) to develop the Iraqi Security Forces.