UTILITARIANISM

Paying Close Attention to

Results: Consequences
Matter
Consequentialist
ethical theories
separate right and wrong actions by
focusing on the consequences of those
actions.
 Does the end justify the means?
● A woman having significant labor pains needs to get to a hospital. Her partner breaks several traffic laws — passing in
no passing zones, speeding, and driving through red lights — in order to get her to the
● A student needs to pass one more class in order to get her civil engineering degree. She has a job waiting that’s
contingent on her getting the degree. She can’t seem to grasp the material in the class, though, so she steals the
answers to the final exam in order to pass..
● And a victim killing the suspect for protecting itself before he or she was about to be killed.

Each of these situations differs in important respects. If you find yourself saying “yes” or “no” to them, or
“yes” to some and “no” to others, ask yourself why.

So the consequences of an action can be understood as the effects caused by an action. And the quality of these
consequences depend on how much good those consequences contain (we talk more about what good is later, but, for
now, it’s fine to think of it as happiness, well-being, or pleasure).
 Believe that the source of right
and wrong is nothing more than the
consequences of actions

Consenquentialism
 Mozi: The first consequentialist
For Mozi, the “good” had three parts, and when the parts were taken together, they
constituted the “general good” of society. Those three parts were that people ought to:
✓ Strive to increase the population of society
✓ Increase its internal order
✓ Work to maximize its material wealth

For Mozi, actions that worked against any promotion of these goals were wrong.
 Mencius believed that the directive to “love everyone
impartially” was unnatural. Instead, he thought that by nature
people love their families and close relations more than they
do strangers. As a result, Mencius believed that because ethics
stems from following human nature, Mozi’s theory was
flawed.

Mencius
 Surveying
What Makes Consequences
Good
What is Consequentialism?

Consequentialism is a philosophical ethics that maximize

strategy to get the GREATEST result of an action. Even if the
two options would give two good result, you would still choose
the GREATEST result than the other.
 "What kind of good
we should pursue about?"
 What is Consequentialist Theory -
Utilitarianism.
*
Utilitarianism is the form of consequentialist
theory that evaluates consequences by how much
happiness and suffering that an action contained.

Utilitarianism says: More pleasure, less pain

(Please!)
 Who is Jeremy Bentham?
Jeremy bentham is an ethicist that introduced
UTILITARIANISM in the western world. He is a british
philosopher who wrote about the principle of morals and
legislation na what it made the consequences better or worse.
What is Principle of Utility?
Utility means happiness,
pleasure, and well-being
Maximizing
Utility
What is Hedonism?
It is an ethical theory suggesting the
pursuit of pleasure is the Ultimate
goal. The theory that seek more
pleasure and avoid pain.
 Bentham’s Hedonistic Calculus
•The intensity of pleasure or pain created by an action.
•The duration of pleasure or pain created by an action.
•The certainty or uncertainty of pleasure
or pain following an action.
•The propinquity, or remoteness, in time
of pleasure or pain following an action.
•The fecundity of pleasure or pain following an action.
 The purity or impurity of pleasure or pain
following an action. This aspect basically means the
opposite
 The extent of an action’s effects

Beethoven or Beer: Recognizing why some pleasures are better than others
Who is John Stuart Mill?
He is a british philosopher who wrote
a book about Utilitarianism.
In what way did Mill define the
Utilitarianism?
Would you rather choose to be a pig
(feeling the most happiness you could
attain without the feeling of pain and
suffering) or would you rather be a
person who you are today?
Putting Utilitarianism into
Actions
 Whose Happiness and Suffering
counts?
Utilitarians like Bentham and Mill have a simple answer to the question “Whose suffering counts?” their answer: EVERYONE’S!

Each person’s happiness or suffering matters equally to the utilitarian. So maximizing utility, or creating the best consequences, requires
impartiality.

That each person’s happiness and suffering matters equally in judging con-sequences is called the equal consideration of interests
(“interests” being a slightly broader term than “utility”).

Most folks probably are used to weighting people’s interests more than others in the case of loved ones.

The equal consideration of interests makes utilitarianism a deeply impartial theory, one that starts to take on a decidedly ethical
appearance. Still, after you factor in the impartiality, the theory becomes more difficult for people to apply.

The equal consideration of interests makes utilitarianism a deeply impartial theory, one that starts to take on a decidedly ethical
appearance. Still, after you factor in the impartiality, the theory becomes more difficult for people to apply.
 How much Happiness is enough?
Sometimes you have to choose between actions with different consequences that all produce a lot of good. Which option should you
choose in this case? Are they all acceptable? Both Bentham and Mill subscribed to what they called the greatest happiness principle.

Peter Singer, a contemporary utilitarian, likes to apply the notion of maximizing happiness to charitable giving. You could spend $10 on
some new music. That would give you and some friends a certain amount of happiness. You wouldn’t be harmed, though, if you didn’t
buy the music. Life may seem bleaker (and quieter!), but you’ll make it. With this in mind, you could donate that $10 to an organization
that helps combat disease and hunger in the developing world. A $10 donation in the developing world buys a lot more than music. It
could buy a lot of food for someone who’s close to starvation.
Two Different Ways to be a
Successful Utilitarian
DIRECTLY INCREASING THE GOOD
THROUGH YOUR ACTIONS

● It holds that you should choose an action that

produces the greatest good for the greatest number.

Act Utilitarianism
Scenario:

● Know the options

● Evaluate the level of good each option produces
● Choose the right action
Scenario:

OPTION A: Save three patients, and preserve much more happiness.

OPTION B: Give all three doses to one patient, thereby losing three people.
INDIRECTLY INCREASING THE GOOD
BY FOLLOWING THE RULES

● It holds that your action should be in accordance to

the rules in order to maximize utility.

Rule Utilitarianism
Scenario:

● Know your general rule of conduct

● Ask what would happen if everyone followed this rule
● Ask the opposite rule
● Choose the best option
Scenario:

OPTION A: Lie, so it will minimize harm.

OPTION B: Tell the truth, but it will cause her pain.

Challenges With
Utilitarianism
CHALLENGE #1
Justice and rights play second fiddle
CHALLENGE #2
Utilitarianism is too demanding
CHALLENGE #3
Utilitarianism may threaten your integrity
CHALLENGE #4
Knowing what produces the most good is impossible
Thank You!

- Group 7