ETHICS

CHAPTER 2: NORMATIVE
ETHICS
Hedonism- is a theory of well-being. The theory that states, how well a life is going
for a person living the life. It lies in the definition of successful life is directly related
to the amount of pleasure in that life no other factors are relevant at all.
Therefore, the more pleasure that a person experiences in life, then the better
their life goes, and vice versa.
- Epiricus (341-270 BC) held the hedonistic view in which intrinsic good for a
person is pleasure, meaning pleasure is always good for a person in and on itself. (not
considering the cause or the context of the pleasure).
The theory states that, pleasure is intrinsically good for a person and less
pleasure is always intrinsically bad.
 Hedonism in a sense is a relatively simple theory of what makes your life better.

In a sense, if you feel like living your life in a mansion can get your life better, or
marrying the man of your dreams in which you attain your desired gratification, then
the explanation behind it would be in the in the Hedonistic point of view.
CHAPTER 2: NORMATIVE
ETHICS
Nozick’s Experience Machine
-Success is viewed for many that gaining meaningful qualification improves one’s life even if no pleasure is
obtained from it. Many would believe that the relationship between what improves your life and what gives you
pleasure is not directly proportional (contrary to the hedonistic view).

Rober Nozick (1938-2002)- contradicts the hedonistic idea that pleasure is the only good. He
countered it by his famous though-experiment saying:
Suppose there was an experience machine that would give you any experience you desired.
Super-duper neuropsychologists could stimulate your brain so that you would think and feel you
were writing a great novel, or making a friend, or reading an interesting book. All the time you
would be floating in a tank, with electrodes attached to your brain. Should you plug into this
machine for life, pre-programming your life experiences? […] Of course, while in the tank you
won’t know that you’re there; you’ll think that it’s all actually happening […] would you plug in?
Nozick’s challenges Hedonism in a sense that pondering into situations wherein one
can get all the pleasure he/she desires lead to making life changing decisions of
leaving others in your life behind you. The result would not guarantee total
satisfaction.
CHAPTER 2: NORMATIVE
ETHICS
Utilitarianism- refers to an action or type of action that is right if it tends to promote
happiness or pleasure and wrong if it tends to promote unhappiness or pain, not just
for the performer of the action but also for everyone that is affected by it.
 Utilitarianism answers the question: “What ought/must a person to do?”
-For Utilitarianism, a person ought/must to act so as to maximize happiness or pleasure and to
minimize unhappiness or pain.
 The basic concept of utilitarianism is in the notion of consequences that includes all the good and bad
produced by the action whether arising after the action has been performed or during its performance.
 It is considered to be one of the most powerful ans persuasive approach to normative ethics.
CHAPTER 2: NORMATIVE
ETHICS-UTILITARIANISM
Utilitarianism is viewed that the morally right action is the action that produces most
good.
It is an approach derived from consequentialism (the right action is understood
entirely in terms of consequences produced).
Utilitarianism is viewed as well by impartiality and agent neutrality. That is,
“everyone’s happiness counts the same.”
 When one maximizes the good, it is the good impartially considered. (In here, the good counts for no
more than anyone else’s good. Also, the reason for having to promote the overall good is the same
reason others has to promote the good. So doing good should not be just particular to one individual.)
The Three Generally Accepted Sayings of Utilitarianism State That:
1. Pleasure, or happiness, is the only thing that has intrinsic value.
2. Actions are right if they promote happiness, and wrong if they promote unhappiness.
3. Everyone's happiness counts equally.
CHAPTER 2: NORMATIVE
ETHICS-UTILITARIANISM
Bentham’s Utilitarianism
 Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)- was one of the first “classical utilitarians”.
-he develop his theory of Utilitarianism on the foundations of a hedonistic approach.
-Bentham believes that the only thing that determines that value of life, or indeed the value of an event or action, is the
amount of pleasure contained in that live or the amount of pleasure produced as a result of the event or the action.
-Therefor we can say that Bentham is a hedonistic utilitarian.
-But for Bentham, Hedonism could be empirically justified by evidence in the world in its favour. For Bentham:
Nature has placed mankind under the governance 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.
There is a presence of factor that guide our behavior to the normative claim on how
we ought/must live.
Bentham’s moral theory are based on bringing about more pleasure and less pain.
So in understanding Utilitarianism, one must understand: (for Bentham)
Utility- that property of any object whereby it tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good
or happiness. Or in other sense, to prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil or unhappiness.

For Bentham, goodness is just an increase in pleasure and evil or unhappiness is just
an increase of pain or decrease pleasure.
Bentham’s Principle of Utility:
By the principle of utility is meant 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: or, what
is the same thing in other words, to promote or to oppose that happiness.
- With this principle it can be said that, promoting utility, defined in terms of
pleasure, is to be approved of reducing utility is to be disapproved of.
The Structure of Bentham’s Utilitarianism
Other than using the Hedonistic view, Bentham’s Utilitarianism also:
1. Consequentialist/Teleological- for the moral values of the action or event is determined
entirely by the consequences of the event.
2. Relativist- certain action is right or wrong is always relative to the situation in which the
action takes place.
3. Maximising- actions lead to pleasure will still not be morally good acts in another action that
could have produced even more pleasure in that setting was rejected.
4. Impartial- what matters is simply securing the maximum amount of pleasure for the maximum
number of people.
Hedonic Calculus- or Felicific Calculus, is formulated by Bentham to address associated future actions
to be a workable moral theory that is address in assessing possible pleasure according to their:
1. Intensity
2. Duration
3. Certainty
4. Remoteness (i.e. how far into the future the pleasure is)
5. Fecundity (i.e. how likely it is that pleasure will generate other related pleasure)
6. Purity (i.e. if any pain will be felt along side that pleasure)
7. Extent (i.e. how many people might be able to share in that pleasure)
- therefore, Hedonic Calculus is supposed to provide decision-procedure for utilitarian approach in a
tricky situation.
Problems with Bentham’s Utilitarianism
1. Problem of Relevant Beings- if pleasure is relative for humans to be felt, what about
those non-humans also being able to feel pleasure.
2. Demanding Objection- if the case is to maxims all opportunities, then the standard of
acting morally must be set extremely high.
3. Problem of Wrong Intentions-utilitarianism ignores the intention and focuses only on
consequences.
4. Problem in Partiality- one must look into the situation as a neutral observer and would
not give special preference to anyone irrespective of emotional attachments.
5. Integrity Objection- not person can give up impartiality when it comes to judgements
about the impact of potential action.
CHAPTER 2: NORMATIVE
ETHICS-UTILITARIANISM
Mill’s Utilitarian Proof
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)- were concerned about the problems which the utilitarian approach
faced in Bentham’s theory. He sought to refine Bentham’s work and have his successful version of
Hedonistic Utilitarianism.
-for Mill, he believed that there was an empirically backed proof able to support the principle of
greatest happiness or pleasure should always be secured for greatest number.
-He emphasizes that there is an empirical defence of Hedonism, and that relies in the evidence from
observation that people desire their own happiness.
-Simply putting, if an individual’s happiness is a good worth pursuing, then happiness in general
must be worth pursuing.
-Mill justified that the claim for the good of happiness is the only thing that makes our lives go
better.
Mill’s Qualitative Utilitarianism
-to do away with the quantitative aspect of Bentham’s pleasure principle, Mill thought
that quality of pleasure was also crucial in deciding what is moral.
-for Bentham, the quantitative aspect of utilitarianism is on the maximisation of
hedonistic pleasure. While as for Mill, he introduces the quality criterion for pleasure, stating:
It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates
dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, is of a different opinion, it is only
because they only know their own side of the question.
-Mill believes that higher pleasures are worth more than lower pleasures.
(Higher pleasures are for intellect for example poetry or reading. While as lower
pleasures are animalistic and base for example bodily satisfaction.)
Mill’s Rule Utilitarianism vs. Bentham’s Act Utilitarianism
Other than having difference between being qualitative and quantitative use of
utilitarianism, here is the difference between Act and Rule Utilitarianism.
Act Utilitarianism- is focused on the consequences of the individual actions when
making moral judgements. This focuses in the outcome of the individual acts. It
argues that we should always choose our actions based on what will cause the
greatest amount of happiness. Where as;
Rule Utilitarianism- adopts a different moral decision-procedure. It is viewed as, we
should create a set of rules that if followed, would produce the greatest amount of
total happiness. This argues that we should figure out what sort of
behavior usually causes happiness, and turn it into a set of rules.
Example:
Take the example of a judge sending a murderer to prison. Say the judge knows the convict will not
commit any more violent crimes, and wants to be lenient based on this knowledge (maybe the
convict is very old or terminally ill). The judge knows that this will make the convict very happy, not
to mention their family and friends. Imagine that the victim’s family has forgiven the convict and
will not feel pain as a result of this decision.

Should the judge let the convict go? Act utilitarianism says yes, because this maximizes happiness
while causing no future pain in this case. But rule utilitarianism says no, because in general convicts
must be punished for their crimes, even if there is no chance that they will commit future crimes. The
judge should follow the rules, according to this argument, even if in this particular case the rule isn’t
necessary.
Retrieved from: https://philosophyterms.com/utilitarianism/
Strong vs. Weak Rule Utilitarianism
1. Strong Rule Utilitarianism: Guidance from the set of rules that, if followed, would
promote the greatest amount of total happiness must always be followed.
2. Weak Rule Utilitarianism: Guidance from the set of rules that, if followed, would
promote the greatest amount of total happiness can be ignored in circumstances
where
So in comparison, the two pillars of Utilitarianism Bentham and Mill,
Bentham Mill

Hedonist Hedonist

All pleasure equally valuable Quality of pleasure matters, Intellectual

vs. animalistic
Act Utilitarian Rule Utilitarian

Teleological, impartial, relativistic, If strong rule Utilitarian, not clear if

maximising teleological or relativistic
Impartial, maximising theory
Other theorist from Utilitarianism
 Henry Sudgwick (1838-1900)
 R.M Hare (1919-2002)
 Peter Singer (1946-)- an advocate of a non-hedonistic approach to Utilitarianism. Believes that what
improves a person’s life is entirely determined by satisfaction of their preferences.
CHAPTER EXERCISE-
RECITATION
In one paragraph with 5 or more sentences, answer the question “In your own
understanding, which type of Utilitarianism do you believe in more? Is it act or rule
utilitarianism?”
Write it on a word document (File name format: Course code, Block Number, Last
Name, Given Name, MI.)
 Example: GEC 7, BSBA FM 2A, Dela Cruz, Juan Pedro I.
 Format:
 Short bond paper
 Times New Roman font
 Font size 12
INDICATE:
 Name: Subject schedule:
 Course/block: Date and Time submitted: (VIA GOOGLE CLASSROOM)
REFERENCES:
Dimmock, M.&A. Fisher(2017).  Ethics for A-Level. Cambridge, UK: Open Book
Publishers. http://doi.org/10.1164/OBP.0125; http://
www.openbookpublishers.com/products/639#resources
Specifically on Normative Ethics: Utilitarianism