Consequentialism: Exploring Utilitarianism and Ethical Egoism

Study Notes

Consequentialism: Balancing Outcomes for Moral Decisions

Consequentialism is a moral theory that evaluates the rightness or wrongness of actions based on their consequences. Rather than focusing on the qualities of the actions themselves, consequentialism looks at the outcomes they produce. In this article, we'll explore two major forms of consequentialism, utilitarianism and ethical egoism, to better understand the impactful role consequentialism plays in moral philosophy.

Utilitarianism

First emerging in 1789 with the publication of Jeremy Bentham's "Principles of Morals and Legislation," utilitarianism posits that the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its consequences, specifically whether it brings about the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of people. John Stuart Mill, one of utilitarianism's most famous proponents, expanded on this by introducing the idea of "higher and lower pleasures," arguing that the greatest good does not necessarily mean the most pleasures but rather the best pleasures, those that are more meaningful and fulfilling for a person.

Utilitarianism faces criticism on multiple fronts. For one, it can lead to counterintuitive results. For instance, sacrificing one person to save five others is considered moral according to utilitarianism, even though it might not feel right to most people. Second, determining the greatest good for the greatest number is a complex task that often requires weighing different variables and perspectives.

Ethical Egoism

A contrasting form of consequentialism, ethical egoism focuses on the individual's self-interest as the ultimate moral goal. According to this theory, the moral value of an action lies in its contribution to the well-being of the person performing it. Ethical egoism was first proposed by David Hume and later elaborated on by Ayn Rand, among others.

Ethical egoism differs from egoism in that it does not advocate selfishness at the expense of others. Instead, it encourages individuals to act in ways that ultimately benefit themselves, which can result in positive outcomes for society as a whole. For example, if each person pursues their own happiness while respecting the rights of others, everyone can benefit from the harmony and cooperation that result.

Critics of ethical egoism argue that it is overly self-centered and does not take into account our obligations to others. They also claim that it is difficult to determine what truly constitutes the individual's well-being, as it can encompass a wide variety of factors, such as personal happiness, health, and social connections.

Common Ground

Despite their differences, both utilitarianism and ethical egoism share a common foundation in consequentialism. They both evaluate moral actions based on their consequences, rather than the actions' inherent qualities. Additionally, they both strive to maximize the amount of good in the world, even if they differ in their perspective on what constitutes good.

Final Thoughts

Consequentialism, in its various forms, presents a powerful and compelling perspective on moral decision-making. By focusing on outcomes, it offers a straightforward and practical approach to ethical evaluation. However, it also faces challenges, such as determining the greatest good for the greatest number, and its potential to lead to counterintuitive results. As a result, consequentialism remains a thought-provoking and influential approach to philosophy, one that continues to inspire debate and further exploration.

Description

Dive into the principles of consequentialism through the lenses of utilitarianism and ethical egoism. Understand how these moral theories assess actions based on their outcomes, emphasizing the importance of consequences over inherent qualities. Explore the commonalities and disparities between utilitarianism and ethical egoism in the realm of moral philosophy.