Liceo de Masbate, Inc.

Quezon St., Masbate City

Ethics w/ Peace Educations
Atty. Francis Djan B. Quidato, JD

LESSON 5: Utilitarianism

When a corporation makes decisions on the basis of cost-benefit analysis, they

are basing their decisions on criteria that is calculated and weighed on the basis of
qualitative and quantitative justifications. Utilitarianism operates in this understanding
of ethical actions as suppose to be always aiming at the greatest good for the greatest
number of people.

After studying this module, you should be able to:

1. Understand utilitarianism
2. Understand Principle of Utility of Jeremy Bentham
3. Understand the John Stuart Mill Utilitarianism
4. Recognize the principles behind the greatest good
5. Review personal convictions on the topic

If we calculate the costs and benefits of our actions, then we are considering an
ethical theory that gives premium to the consequences of our actions as the basis of
morality; such is utilitarianism.

1.0 Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory that places the locus of right and wrong
solely on the outcomes (consequences) of choosing one action/policy over other
actions/policies. As such, it moves beyond the scope of one's own interests and takes
into account the interests of others.
This philosophy is also known as Consequentialism that says the rightness or
wrongness of an object depends on the effect of the consequence regardless of the
method it utilized.

There are two kinds of utilitarianism and they are Act utilitarian and Rule
utilitarian, the first believed about the goodness or badness of a particular act. An
example is the assassination of former Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1984 that
was an act of murder by the civilized people but to the perpetuators it was an act
beneficial to the maligned Indian minority. The principle of utility is applied directly to
each alternative act in a situation of choice. The right act is then defined as the one
which brings about the best results (or the least amount of bad results). Criticisms of
this viewpoint to the difficulty of attaining full knowledge and certainty of the
consequences of our actions. It is possible to justify immoral acts using AU: Suppose
you could end a regional war by torturing children whose fathers are enemy soldiers,
thus revealing the hideouts of the fathers.

Rule utilitarian means the goodness or evilness of an act itself. Say abortion may be
an evil act but Western civilization view it as a means to combat population explosion.
Morality is defined, simply as increasing good and decreasing evil by eliminating
traditions, taboos or archaic beliefs that obstruct human development.

The principle of utility is used to determine the validity of rules of conduct (moral
principles). A rule like promise-keeping is established by looking at the consequences of
a world in which people broke promises at will and a world in which promises were
binding.

Right and wrong are then defined as following or breaking those rules. Some
criticisms of this position point out that if the Rules take into account more and more
exceptions, RU collapses into AU. More general criticisms of this view argue that it is
possible to generate "unjust rules" according to the principle of utility. For example,
slavery in Greece might be right if it led to an overall achievement of cultivated
happiness at the expense of some mistreated individuals.

These age-old beliefs put man in a “primitive” way of life that denied their right to
free-will and are a bane to human behavior. The proponents of this theory were Jeremy
Bentham and John Stuart Mill wherein the first thought about this idea and later shared
to his pupil which the latter propagated for humanity albeit with his own
interpretation. Despite being thinkers of the 18th Century, their ideas were utilized by
the present generation but were doubted for its absurdities. That even today the ideas
of these scholars were unsure as to they tend to Act Utilitarian or Rule Utilitarian. Their
writings are ambiguous that they have no idea what utilitarian act they subscribe.

Utilitarianism, thus, is an ethical theory that argues for the goodness of pleasure and
the determination of right behavior based on the usefulness of the action’s
consequences. This means that pleasure is good and that the goodness of an action is
determined by its usefulness.

2.0 The Philosophies of Bentham and Mill

Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832) proposed utilitarianism in this premises: 1) Human life is
greatly-affected by pleasure and pain; 2) consequences of actions are caused by pleasure
and pain; 3) the idea of anything pleasurable is good and anything painful is evil is
absolute; and 4) Pleasure and pain can be quantified. To sum it up, man’s happiness is
quantified by either pleasure and pain and nothing else. They can be measured
according to the following criteria such as: intensity, duration, certainty and nearness.
John
John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873) for his part clarified his professors’ stand by making his
own counterpoint: 1) the quality of happiness is more important than its quantity; 2) the
quality of happiness cannot be measured for these things are felt and no amount of
calculation can quantify it; 3) Mill believed in the idea of the “General Happiness of the
People” that happiness can be felt by everyone, in short common happiness.

3.0 Frameworks and Principles Behind our Moral

In determining the moral preferability of actions, Bentham provides a framework for
evaluating pleasure and pain commonly called as FELICIFIC CALCULUS. In this
framework, an action can be evaluated on the basis of intensity or strength of pleasure,
duration or length of the experience of pleasure, certainty or uncertainty, or the
likelihood that pleasure will occur, and propinquity, remoteness or how soon there will
be pleasure. This means that actions are evaluated on this single scale regardless of
preferences and values. In this sense, pleasure and pain can only quantitatively differ
but not qualitatively differ from other experiences of pleasure and pain accordingly.
Mill dissents. He thinks that the principle of utility must distinguish pleasures
qualitatively and not merely quantitatively. We, as moral agents, are capable of
searching and desiring higher intellectual pleasures. Mill argues that quality is more
preferable than quantity. The test that Mills suggests is in deciding over two
comparable pleasures, it is more important to experience both and to discover which
one is actually more preferred than the other. There is no other way of determining
which of two pleasures is preferable except by appealing to the actual preferences and
experiences. Actual choices of knowledgeable persons point to higher intellectual
pleasures as more preferable than purely sensual appetites.

4.0 Principle of Utility

 According to Bentham – Our actions are governed by two sovereign masters –
which he calls pleasure and pain. These “masters” are given to us by nature to help us
determine what is good or bad and what ought to be done and not. The principle of
utility is about our subjection to these sovereign masters: pleasure and pain. On the one
hand, the principle refers to the motivation of our actions as guided by our avoidance of
pain and our desire for pleasure. On the other hand, the principle also refers to pleasure
as good if and only if they produce more happiness than unhappiness. This means that
it is not enough to experience pleasure, but to also inquire whether the things we do
make us happier. Having identified the tendency for pleasure and the avoidance of pain
as the principle of utility, Bentham equates happiness with pleasure.
According to Mill – He reiterates moral good as happiness and, consequently,
happiness as pleasure. Mill clarifies that what makes people happy is intended pleasure
and what makes us unhappy is the privation of pleasure. The things that produce
happiness and pleasure are good; whereas, those that produce unhappiness and pain
are bad. Clearly, Mill argues that we act and do things because we find them
pleasurable and we avoid doing things because they are painful.
For Bentham and Mill – the pursuit for pleasure and the avoidance of pain are not
only important principles – they are in fact the only principle in assessing an action’s
morality.
ACTIVITY 1.
Compare and contrast in your own words the position of Benthan and Mills
utilitarianism.

5.0 The Common Good and The Principle of the Greatest Number
 The Common Good - *in the context of utilitarianism* one’s actions and behavior are
good inasmuch as they are directed toward the experience of the greatest pleasure over
pain for the greatest number of persons.
Principle of the Greatest Number – equating happiness with pleasure does not aim
to describe the utilitarian moral agent alone and independently from others. This is not
only about our individual pleasures, regardless of how high, intellectual, or in other
ways noble it is, but it is also about the pleasure of the greatest number affected by the
consequences of our actions. Utilitarianism cannot lead to selfish acts. If we are the only
ones satisfied by our actions, it does not constitute a moral good. It is necessary for us to
consider everyone’s happiness, including our own, as the standard by which to
evaluate what is moral.

6.0 Justice and Rights

Mill understands justice as a respect for rights directed toward society’s pursuit
for the greatest happiness of the greatest number. For him, rights are a valid claim on
society and are justified by utility. This means that society is made happier if its citizens
are able to live their lives knowing that their interests are protected and that society (as
a whole) defends it. We are treated justly when our legal and moral rights are respected.
Mill understands that legal rights are neither inviolable nor natural. He points out that
when legal rights are not morally justified in accordance to the greatest happiness
principle, then these rights need neither be observed, nor be respected. Plato defined
justice as universal, absolute and eternal, the components of justice are harmony and
unity.

ACTIVITY 2.
Bentham argues that the interest of a few persons can be sacrificed if it benefits a greater
number. Mill argues that the determination of the better pleasure is dependent on the
decision of a majority of people who experienced both pleasures. Give at least five (5)
things or activities that give you pleasure which you are willing to sacrifice in order for
the greater number of people (friends, family and community) to be happy. Briefly
explain why it would make greater number of people happy.

1.

2.
 3.

4.

5.

LESSON 6: Justice and Fairness

At the end of this module, you are expected to:
1. To define justice and social justice
2. To understand Law and the State
3. To discern how societies dispense justice

1.0 Social Justice

What is Social Justice? Plato in his writing “The Republic” dubbed social justice as
Pantheism because he compared justice or fairness as the universe in its entirety that is
moved by an invisible source. The universe has been here since time immemorial and
no one can determine the age but why is it that it never collided and still “in order”? He
defined justice as universal, absolute and eternal. But what is justice, Merriam and
Webster defined it as, the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by
the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or
punishments. So, to correlate that with Plato’s “The Republic”, the components of
justice is harmony and unity. But that can never be attained if there is no State which is
the very purpose why the need for state, politics and law is a must in every society.
Social Justice only came in to being during the 19th Century in the Industrial Revolution
to be exact by European counties. The populace who was fed up by their monarchs
demand justice and fairness based on the premises of equality among men and to
resolve capitalist exploitation. This later expanded to issue such as rights of the poor,
equal distribution of wealth, race, gender and the likes. Aristotle, Plato’s most apt
subordinate gave his own definition when he said, "equals should be treated equally
and unequals unequally” that means that individuals must be treated the same but if
necessity dictates there are exceptions. For example, John and Joanne are both workers
in the same factory and in the same position and are having the same compensation.
However, there are things may differ when it comes to age, sex, educational
background or religious belief.
2.0 State and Law
State is a community of persons more or less numerous permanently occupying a
definite territory having a government of their own to which a great body of inhabitants
render habitual obedience and enjoying freedom from external control. A State has the
following elements namely: 1) People: Mass of population living within the state; 2)
Territory: Land, maritime, aerial and fluvial area over which jurisdiction exists; 3)
Government: The agency through which the will of the state is carried out; 4)
Sovereignty: Supreme power of the state to enforce its will on the people without
foreign intervention and; 5) Recognition: the acceptance of a nation into the Family of
Nations.
A law is part and parcel of a state and is defined as any rule that if broken will
mete punishments to offenders. It is also defined as a body of rules made by the
government interpreted by the courts and backed by the power of the State. It is a legal
order which refers to a specialized phase of social control. Law is not only a means to a
civilization but also a product of civilization according to Roscoe Pound, the spokesman
for the School of Social Jurisprudence. Law is responsible for social engineering for it is
a mechanism in reacting to changes in a society. laws are susceptible to change and is
not bound by traditions and legends and is created for the interest of all members of
society.

3.0 Government and Justice

1) Egalitarianism - Egalitarianism is a trend of thought in political philosophy. It favors
equality to everyone where people are treated the same as equals. Justice is given to
everyone regardless of race color or creed.
2) Communism - is simply based class dictatorship of the proletariat (the ruling party).
This type of governance was thought of by Karl Marx, where a society is dominated by
one class over the entire state. Socialism is the reciprocal of capitalism, where state
control of the economy is the nation’s priority.
3) Socialism - A political ideology that advocates for an equal redistribution of wealth
and power in society through a democratic ownership and distribution of society’s
means of production (or means of making money).
ACTIVITY 1
Write an essay on what Justice is in your own opinion.