WEIGHING SOCIAL COSTS & BENEFITS

Proposed by Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) An action is right from Ethical point of view only when Sum of total utilities produced by that act is greater than sum of total utilities produced in any other act Assumes that we can measure benefits & harm

Steps Involved: Determine all alternative actions Estimate benefits & costs Choose best action An action should provide utility for every one concerned rather than specific individual

How can you measure & compare Utility? How do you measure value/utility of life/health? How do you measure future benefits or costs of an action, information? How do you compare economics goods (pizza, music CD) with non economic goods (life, freedom, beauty)? Can you always place consequences over actions?

Right: A Person has a right when that person is entitled to act in a certain way or entitled to have others act in a certain way towards him/her. Legal Right: Entitlement that derives from legal system. They are limited to particular jurisdiction of legal system in place. Moral Right: Entitlement that derives from moral standards independent of legal jurisdiction. Features of Moral Rights: Correlated with Duties Freedom & Equality in pursuit of Interests Provide Basis for justifying ones actions & Invoking protection

Correlated with duties: Others have duties towards the bearer of that right E.g my moral right is to worship so duty of others is not to interfere

Freedom & Equality in pursuit of Moral Right: Pursuit of moral rights must not be subordinated to the interests of others except for specially weighted reasons

Provide Basis for justifying ones actions & Invoking protection: If I have moral right to do something, then I have moral justification for doing it & if someone stops the other person from interfering in my moral rights, then he/she is justified to do so

Moral rights focuses on individual whereas , Utilitarian focuses on society

Utilitarian principles are based on aggregate utility whereas rights places limits on societys interference to individual In Extreme conditions, Utility principles may override individual rights, e.g war, emergencies etc Rights Erect higher walls around individuals, so walls of societal benefits must be greater to overcome them

Negative Rights: Duties other have to not interfere in certain activities of the person who holds the right. If I have a right to privacy, then every other person has a duty not to intervene in my privacy Positive Rights: duties of others to provide the holder of the right with whatever he or she needs to freely pursue his or her interests. If I have a right to eat in order to survive, & unable to do so then its a duty of society to provide me resources for doing so

Contractual rights & duties: Sometimes known as special rights & duties Limited rights & duties which arise when a person enters into an agreement with the other person. You Acquire a contractual right to whatever I promised & I have a contractual duty to fulfill that promise Distinguishing features of Contractual rights & Duties Concerned with specific individuals involved Arise from specific transactions Publically accepted system of rules Provide Basis for Special Duties

Distinguishing features of Contractual rights & Duties Concerned with specific individuals involved Only involved parties acquire these rights & duties Arise from specific transactions Applies Only when involved parties make a contractual agreement with each other Publically accepted system of rules Contractual Agreements require certain publically/legally accepted rules to be followed Provide Basis for Special Duties Doctors acquire special duty of care towards patients Married people acquire special duty of care for each other & their children

Both parties must have full knowledge of the nature of contract

Misrepresentation of facts is forbidden Neither party must be forced to enter a contract

The contract must not bind the parties to an immoral contract

How do people know they have rights?? One way to answer is that people live in legal system so they acquire some legal right

How do we establish Moral rights? Utilitarian's suggest their principles provide reason for moral rights because moral rights maximizes utility

Categorical Imperative: Everyone should be treated as free, equal to every one else Argues that there are 2 ways of formulating moral principles First Formulation: Law Of Maxim: The thing you do becomes a universal law Universalizability: The Persons reason for acting must be reasons that everyone could act on Reversibility: A Persons reasons for acting must be reasons that he/she is willing to have others use & how others treat him/her. Kant argues that , A persons actions has moral worth only to the degree that it is also motivated by a sense of duty, that is, a belief that it is a right way for all people to behave Unlike Utilitarian principle, Kant focuses on interior motives rather then consequences of external actions.

Second Formulation An action is morally right for a person if, and only if, in performing the action, the person does not use others merely as a means for advancing his or her own interests, but also both respects and develops their capacity to choose freely for themselves. E.g An employee should be told all the risk factors involved in a particular job beforehand, & should be allowed to freely choose the course of action

Second Formulation: Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end. Treating everyone same means that the existence of the person should be promoted.

Is everyone willing to allow a universal policy on certain matters (1st Formulation) E.g) Would a murdered want all murderers to be punished severely? On the other end he wants this policy to be protected from others Conflict regarding using someone merely as a mean & giving free choice (2nd Formulation) E.g) Employer pays minimum wages & let them work in unhealthy environmentbut also allows them to choose freely whether to work or go somewhere else?? Conflicts in counter examples of universalism & reversibility E.g) Someone discriminates on the bases of race & is willing to accept discrimination on himself as well, then??