Chapter 4: Utilitarianism (PDF)

CHAPTER IV UTILITARIANISM: JOHN STUART MILL GROUP 1. LEARNING OUTCOMES AT THE END OF THIS CHAPTER, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: 01. ARTICULATE THE MEANING OF CONSEQUENTIAL ETHICS. 02. ANALYZE THE GREATEST HAPPINESS...

CHAPTER IV UTILITARIANISM: JOHN STUART MILL GROUP 1. LEARNING OUTCOMES AT THE END OF THIS CHAPTER, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: 01. ARTICULATE THE MEANING OF CONSEQUENTIAL ETHICS. 02. ANALYZE THE GREATEST HAPPINESS PRINCIPLES. 03. EXAMIN THE OBJECTIONS TO MILL'S POSITION AND HIS RESPONSES TO EACH THEM; AND 04. EVALUATE ETHICAL DECISION FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF UTILITARIANISM. INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION Human decisions always have consequences. Decisions bring forth new ideas, objects, and relationships into play in the realm of action and thought. Decisions are judged as good if they are brought about by good and just motives and result in good consequences. Decisions are considered bad if they are motivated by anything most of society deems as malicious, such as selfishness, spite, or envy, and if they have destructive consequences. Particular decisions have particular consequences that correspond to how one's motives translated into action through a decision. INTRODUCTION John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) - considered by many to be the most influential. - His utilitarian theory of morality is a development and clarification of the earlier form of the theory authored by Jeremy Bentham and espoused by his father. - James Mill homeschooled John Stuart on the Benthamite doctrine. Which essentially states that, it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong. Happiness in this context is understood as the predominance of pleasure over pain. - John Stuart Mill, later on, revises those doctrine by highlighting a distinction between qualities and quantities of pleasures and pains INTRODUCTION Bentham's Felicific/Hedonistic Calculus is a method/guide to balance the pros and cons of a proposed course of action in relation to the balance of pleasures and pains it potentially produces. These are some guide questions to measure it. 1. Intensity. How strong is the pleasure? 2. Duration: How long does the pleasure last? 3.Certainty or uncertainty: How likely or unlikely that the pleasure will occur? 4. Propinquity or remoteness: How soon does the pleasure occur? 5. Fecundity: What is the probability that the action is followed by sensations of the same kind? 6. Purity: What is the probability that it is not followed by sensations of the opposite kind? 7. Extent: How many people are affected? THE GREATEST HAPPINESS PRINCIPLES -USED AS THE FOUNDATION FOR UTILITARIANISM AND A UTILITARIAN STANDARD, THE GREATEST HAPPINESS PRINCIPLE SAYS ACTIONS ARE MORAL IF THEY PROMOTE UTILITY BUT IMMORAL IF THEY PROMOTE THE OPPOSITE. -FOR MILL, HAPPINESS IS DEFINED AS PLEASURE AND THE ABSENCE OF PAIN, WHILE UNHAPPINESS IS PAIN OR THE ABSENCE OF PLEASURE. HIGHER AND LOWER PLEASURES -MILL DISTINGUISHES BETWEEN HIGHER AND LOWER FORMS OF PLEASURE. HIGHER PLEASURES ENGAGE OUR INTELLECTUAL AND MORAL FACULTIES, SUCH AS READING, PHILOSOPHIZING, OR ENGAGING IN MEANINGFUL CONVERSATION, WHILE LOWER PLEASURES ARE MORE RELATED TO PHYSICAL SENSATIONS. -TO DETERMINE WHICH PLEASURE IS OF HIGHER QUALITY, MILL SUGGESTS THAT WE SHOULD CONSULT PEOPLE WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED BOTH TYPES. IF THESE EXPERIENCED INDIVIDUALS CONSISTENTLY PREFER ONE PLEASURE OVER ANOTHER, EVEN IF IT INVOLVES MORE DISCOMFORT, THAT PLEASURE IS CONSIDERED OF HIGHER QUALITY. QUALITY OVER QUANTITY IN PLEASURES - UNLIKE BENTHAM, WHO FOCUSED ON THE QUANTITY OF PLEASURE, MILL EMPHASIZES THE QUALITY OF PLEASURE. THE RIGHTNESS OF AN ACTION SHOULD CONSIDER NOT JUST HOW MANY PEOPLE BENEFIT BUT ALSO THE QUALITY OF THE PLEASURE INVOLVED. FOR EXAMPLE, EVEN IF MORE PEOPLE GAIN IMMEDIATE PLEASURE FROM PLAYING ONLINE GAMES, THE INTELLECTUAL DEVELOPMENT AND LONG-TERM BENEFITS OF STUDYING MAKE IT A HIGHER PLEASURE. THE GREATEST HAPPINESS PRINCIPLES When choosing between playing online games and studying school lessons, one must consider their higher faculties, the benefits to others, and the happiness they can bring.  THE GREATEST HAPPINESS PRINCIPLES To restate, the Greatest Happiness Principle, as the ultimate end of action, sponsors the view that morality is about fostering an existence that is exempt from pain as much as possible and one that is capable of enjoying pleasures befitting a human person in terms of both quantity and quality which benefits not just oneself but for others as well REPLIES TO OBJECTION TO THE OBJECTION THAT HAPPINESS IS UNATTAINABLE - According to Mill's proposition, it says that happiness is unattainable. Mill responds by saying that if his objectors define happiness as a community of highly pleasurable excitement, then it is true that such a life is indeed impossible. PLEASURE OFTEN ONLY LAST FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD. " A Pleasure deprived from eating only last until one experiences hunger once more. While a Pleasure deprived from being with one's friend often last for as long as one is on good terms with them." Mill says that the life of happiness defined in his theory is not a life of rapture but an existence made up of a few transitory pains and different pleasures with a decided predominance of pleasure over pain. REPLIES TO OBJECTION He adds that history has shown us that a satisfied and happy life is mainly composed of a balance between tranquility and excitement. Those who find no happiness in such a state, he says, are generally those who care for no one but themselves. On the other hand, those who have cultivated friendships and have left a lasting legacy of fellow feeling for mankind to retain their happiness in any circumstance whether it be in lively moments or on the eve of death. REPLIES TO OBJECTION Another reason why some experience difficulties in being happy is lack of mental cultivation. A person that has developed and harnessed one's mind to find pleasure in the realms of nature, poetry, art, and science continually find sources of joy in his/her life, no matter the circumstance. THE OBJECTION THAT UTILITARIAN MORALITY IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH SELF-SACRIFICE - Another objection to Mill's theory is that it does not recognize the value of self- sacrifice. If self-sacrifice is merely done for its own sake, then utilitarianism sees it as a waste. ex. Jesus Christ's teaching to love your neighbor as oneself, expressing how utilitarianism values the other person as much as oneself. The kind of sacrifice Mill finds reasonable is the kind that produces consequences that benefit more people other than oneself. Utilitarianism upholds the belief that a truly moral person always tries to incorporate the good of others in every decision he/she makes. Thus, in the case of self-sacrifice, it is morally acceptable so long as it is done for the sake of the good of the greatest number.  TO THE OBJECTION THAT SOCIAL CONCERN IS A RARE MOTIVE FOR ACTION ❖ For Mill, a distinction must be made between the motives and the consequences of one's actions with respect to which of the two is the basis for judging an act to be moral or not. ❖ One must distinguish between the rule of action and the motive. ❖ From the utilitarian perspective, the motive has nothing to do with the morality of an action. ❖ Mill says that a great number of actions are meant to benefit individuals rather than the greater majority. ex. Thought Experiment - The Trolley Problem A runaway trolley is heading down the tracks toword five workers who will all be killed if the trolley proceeds on its present course. Ben is standing next to a large switch that can divert the trolley onto a different track. The only way to save the lives of the five workers is to divert the trolley onto another track that only has one worker on it. If Ben diverts the trolley onto the other STRATEGY N°1 STRATEGY N°2 track, this one worker will die, but the other five workers will be saved. STRATEGY N°3 This is a classic ethical dilemma formulated by Philippa Foot In 1967, Examine and reflect on this scenario. What would be the moral course of action for a utilitarian in this case?  THE ULTIMATE SANCTIONS >Although external sanctions like those that emanate from social and supernatural sources enforce the utilitarian principle, the do not compel one to follow it. They cannot bind persons fully to any moral principle because they are only truly bound to a principle if they feel in themselves that they have to abide by it. Ultimately, according to Mill, it is mans "feeling for humanity" that constitutes the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility. This is the internal sanction of utility. >One of the external sanctions that provide the impetus for moral conduct is one's fear of displeasing God(if one believes in a God). A believer's moral compass is often times determined by his/her desire to please his/her creator for he/she feels that he/she owes Him seeing as He is considered to be the source of everything that exists.  THE ULTIMATE SANCTIONS >The other external sanction is the fear of disapproval from other people. >Such a motive takes into account the opinions of others with respect to what is advantageous or disadvantageous for them before one acts and may, therefore be seen as coherent with the principle of utility. >Although external sanctions do promote the welfare of the whole, it is still the internal sanction of conscience that is considered as the ultimate sanction of morality. Conscience is the internalization of external sanctions of morality that feels remorse each time one acts without considering first the effect or consequences of one's actions to other people's lives.  THE ULTIMATE SANCTIONS >This feeling of fellowship with other people is what ultimately drives one to persevere to be moral. As a social being, the human person has the ability to gauge the morality of his/her action in the context of preserving the harmony between his/her pleasures and the pleasures of others. In the end, one can only sleep well at night when he/she has a clear conscience. CONCLUSION In this chapter, one learned that utilitarianism espouses the idea of the Greatest Happiness Principle, which states that actions are right when they promote the happiness of the greatest number and wrong if they cause the opposite. The principle of utility judges the morality of actions based on consequences. If an action leads to the happiness of more persons, then that action is considered moral. CONCLUSION However, Mill makes an important distinction between the quantity and quality of happiness or pleasure. He holds that utilitarianism is not only interested in promoting the happiness of the most number of persons, but it also takes into account the kind or quality of happiness an action is likely to produce. CONCLUSION Pleasures of the Mind are considered higher than the pleasures of the flesh. With respect to matters of deliberation on what forms of pleasure are to be regarded as higher than others, Mill points to the opinions of competent judges who have both knowledge and experience of a wide spectrum of pleasures which make them capable of truly appreciating the differences and varying degrees and qualities of pleasures. CONCLUSION The aim of utilitarianism, therefore, is to promote a moral way of life that considers the welfare of the community and not just one's own, such that Mill declares that it is the internal sanction of conscience that serves as the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility. CONCLUSION To think of the consequences of one's actions (both quantitatively and qualitatively) in the context of the community is to be moral. To contribute to the pleasure of others and to decrease the measure of pain that afflicts them is one's realization of a truly moral life. CONCLUSION So far, you have learned moral theories that are Western in their origin. In the next section, you will be introduced to how the East envisions a moral way of life. Gandhi's dictum of non-violence, Buddha's path to enlightenment, and Confucian ethics are all discussed in the hope of expanding and deepening your historical appreciation of moral questions. THANK'S FOR WATCHING