utilitarianism Flashcards
What is the principle of utility?
The defining principle of act utilitarianism: 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’ (Bentham)
What is utility?
The property of an object or action in virtue of which it tends to produce happiness.
What is hedonism?
The claim that pleasure is happiness and the only good
What is Bentham’s felicific calculus?
In Bentham’s hedonic act utilitarianism, the felicific calculus is the means of calculating pleasures and pains caused by an action and adding them up on a single scale. The total amount of happiness produced is the sum total of everyone’s pleasures minus the sum total of everyone’s pains.
What are Mill’s secondary principles?
Secondary principles are moral ‘rules of thumb’ that if followed, generally produce happiness, e.g. tell the truth. Mill argues that we have learned secondary principles through human history, through trial and error.
What is preference utilitarianism?
The theory that we should maximise happiness which is understood not in terms of pleasure or pain but in terms of the satisfaction of individuals’ preferences
What is a preference?
A preference is what is in someone’s best interests. Preferences are used in preference utilitarianism as an alternative to hedonistic forms of utilitarianism.
Explain how an act utilitarian would make a moral decision.
Act utilitarianism claims that actions are right or wrong based on their consequences alone and that an act is right if it maximises what is good. The only good for act utilitarians is happiness. Hedonist act utilitarianism understands happiness in terms of the balance of pleasure over pain. When making a moral decision, an act utilitarian would therefore assess whether the expected consequences of a particular act produce more pleasure than pain. If this is the case, then the act is deemed morally correct.
Explain how a rule utilitarian would make a moral decision.
Rule utilitarianism claims that only happiness is good, and the right act is the act that complies with those rules which, if everyone followed them, would lead to the greatest happiness for all affected (compared to any other set of rules). When making a moral decision, e.g. whether or not to steal, a rule utilitarian would appeal to the relevant rule ‘do not steal’ in order to determine what to do. Following this rule would ensure a correct moral decision is made rather than trying to calculate the utility of a particular act.
Explain Mill’s higher and lower pleasures.
In Mill’s quantitative hedonistic utilitarianism, he argues that not all pleasures are of equal worth and that the quality of the pleasure matters, not just the quantity. There are two distinct kinds of pleasures. Higher pleasures, which are the more valuable, engage faculties like the intellect or the imagination and aid our moral and spiritual development, e.g. reading Shakespeare. Lower pleasures involve the body and the senses, e.g. eating ice cream. A pleasure is higher than another if almost everyone who is ‘competently acquainted’ with both prefers one over the other.
Explain the criticism that utilitarianism could lead to the ‘tyranny of the majority’.
Utilitarianism claims that actions are right or wrong based on their consequences alone and that an act is right if it maximises what is good (happiness). Mill raises the concern that utilitarianism can lead to the ‘tyranny of the majority’: the unjust exercise of power by a majority of people over a minority who have different values or desires, e.g. outlawing a minority religion or homosexuality because a majority want it outlawed. Mill notes that a majority can exercise their power over minorities in two ways: through legislation and through social opinion with the latter affecting how minorities think, feel, and live.
Explain why utilitarianism has an issue with partiality.
Utilitarianism claims that an act is right if it maximises what is good (happiness) and that everyone’s happiness is of equal importance. We should therefore be impartial in how we treat others. However, the issue of partiality argues that utilitarianism is too idealistic and demanding in its call for impartiality. In reality, we are not equally concerned with the happiness of everyone and instead tend to be partial towards certain people, e.g. family and friends, and privilege the happiness of those we care about. Additionally, it can be argued that utilitarianism misses the moral importance of partiality, that each person does not and should not count equally to us – there is something morally right about attachments of love and friendship.
Explain the difference between Bentham’s quantitative hedonistic utilitarianism and Mill’s qualitative hedonistic utilitarianism.
Both Bentham and Mill claim that actions are right or wrong based on their consequences alone and that an act is right if it maximises what is good (happiness). However, while Bentham’s hedonistic utilitarianism is quantitative, Mill’s is qualitative. Bentham emphasises the balance of the quantity of pleasure a given act is expected to produce over the quantity of pain. He puts forward the felicific calculus as the means of calculating pleasures and pains caused by an action and adding them up on a single scale. The total amount of happiness produced is the sum total of everyone’s pleasures minus the sum total of everyone’s pains. Mill however argues that not all pleasures are of equal worth and that the quality of the pleasure matters, not just the quantity. Failing to acknowledge this degrades humans and reduces utilitarianism to a ‘doctrine worthy only of swine’. He therefore introduces the differentiation of pleasures, claiming that higher pleasures (associated with the intellect, imagination, feelings) are more valuable than lower pleasures (associated with the body and senses).
Explain Mill’s proof of utilitarianism.
Explain Mill’s proof of utilitarianism.
Utilitarianism claims that the only thing that is good and so the only thing that our actions and lives should aim at is happiness. Mill’s proof of utilitarianism is in two stages. The first stage aims to establish that happiness is good, and Mill argues that the only evidence for this is that, based on observation, people actually desire the good. The second stage aims to establish that happiness is the only good. Mill argues that anything else that people desire, e.g. truth, freedom is either an external means to happiness (instrumental to happiness) or a constitutive means to happiness (part of happiness). Mill claims that it is not possible to desire something that you do not think is a pleasure and so happiness is the only goo
Explain Moore’s objection to Mill’s proof of utility.
Explain Moore’s objection to Mill’s proof of utility.
Moore argues that in the first stage of Mill’s proof (where Mill aims to establish that happiness is good), Mill commits a fallacy of equivocation. In the first stage, Mill claims that the only evidence for something being good is that people desire it and that people desire happiness. He gives an analogy to illustrate this claim and compares whether or not something is desirable to whether or not something is visible. However, Moore argues that here Mill equivocates between two meanings of ‘desirable’: 1. worthy of being desired and 2. capable of being desired. In the analogy, if something is visible this means it is capable of being viewed. The analogy would then imply that if something is desirable, this means it is capable of being desired. But what Mill must show in his proof is that happiness is worthy of being desired, not just capable of being desired. Moore therefore argues that Mill’s proof fails.
