Professional Documents
Culture Documents
An Introduction to the Moral Theories of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill
Ethical Judgments
Ethical philosophy differs from the sciences because it is normative or prescriptive, rather than descriptive. In other words, ethics tell us how we ought to act or what we should do, while the sciences are more likely to observe how things are in nature or society.
Utilitarianism says that the Result or the Consequence of an Act is the real measure of whether it is good or bad. This theory emphasizes Ends over Means. Theories, like this one, that emphasize the results or consequences are called teleological or consequentialist.
Jeremy Bentham
Man is under two great masters, pain and pleasure. The great good that we should seek is happiness. (a hedonistic perspective) Those actions whose results increase happiness or diminish pain are good. They have utility.
In determining the quantity of happiness that might be produced by an action, we evaluate the possible consequences by applying several values: Intensity, duration, certainty or uncertainty, propinquity or remoteness, fecundity, purity, and extent.
Consequentialism: The rightness of actions is determined solely by their consequences. Hedonism: Utility is the degree to which an act produces pleasure. Hedonism is the thesis that pleasure or happiness is the good that we seek and that we should seek. Maximalism: A right action produces the greatest good consequences and the least bad. Universalism: The consequences to be considered are those of everyone affected, and everyone equally.
Two Formulations of Utilitarian Theory Greatest Happiness: Principle of Utility: The best action is that which produces the greatest happiness and/or reduces pain. We ought to do that which produces the greatest happiness and least pain for the greatest number of people.
ct: An Action is right if and only if it produces the greatest balance of pleasure over pain for the greatest number. (Jeremy Bentham)
Rule: An action is right if and only if it conforms to a set of rules the general acceptance of which would produce the greatest balance of pleasure over pain for the greatest number. (John Stuart Mill)
A) You attempt to help an elderly man across the street. He gets across safely. Conclusion: the Act was a good act.
B) You attempt to
help an elderly man across the street. You stumble as you go, he is knocked into the path of a car, and is hurt. Conclusion: The Act was a bad act.
If you can use eighty soldiers as a decoy in war, and thereby attack an enemy force and kill several hundred enemy soldiers, that is a morally good choice even though the eighty might be lost. If lying or stealing will actually bring about more happiness and/or reduce pain, Act Utilitarianism says we should lie and steal in those cases.
The decision was made not to inform the town that they would be bombed.
The Ford Pinto case: A defective vehicle would sometimes explode when hit.
The model was not recalled and repaired by Ford because they felt it was cheaper to pay the liability suits than to recall and repair all the defective cars.
Mill argues that we must consider the quality of the happiness, not merely the quantity. For example, some might find happiness with a pitcher of beer and a pizza. Others may find happiness watching a fine Shakespearean play. The quality of happiness is greater with the latter.
Criticisms of Utilitarianism
If I am to bring the greatest happiness to the greatest number, not putting my own happiness above others, that may lead to a dilemma. I live in a neighborhood where 83% of my neighbors use drugs. I could make them most happy by helping supply them with cheap drugs, but I feel uncomfortable doing that. What should a utilitarian do?
Criticisms of Utilitarianism
Bernard Williams criticizes the implied doctrine of negative responsibility in Utilitarianism. For example, a thug breaks into my home and holds six people hostage, telling us he will kill all of us. However, the thug says, if you will kill two of your family, I will let you and the other three live. With Utilitarianism, the good thing to do is to kill two members of my family.
Criticisms of Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism plays fast and loose with Gods commandments. If lying, stealing, or killing could lead to an increase of happiness for the greatest number, we are told we should lie, steal or kill. Isnt that a rejection of Gods commands?
Does God make arbitrary rules just to see if we will obey? Does God make rules that He knows will lead to our happiness?
If the latter statement is true, doesnt it make sense God would want us to use our God-given reason to look at the situation?
Many philosophers hold that we have certain rights, either from God, nature, or from a social contract Can the idea of rights be made compatible with Utilitarianism? If ignoring rights brings about more happiness to the greatest number, should we ignore so-called rights? Mills rule-based view in On Liberty; having a right to liberty will bring the greatest happiness
Baucus & Baucus (2000) Singled out 67 companies out of the Fortune 500 that had at least one illegal act ex: antitrust, product liabilities, discrimination Performance of the convicted firms were compared to unconvicted firms (five year after the fraud was committed) Convicted firms experienced significantly lower return on sales (three year lag) Multiple convictions are more disastrous Unethical activities can affect long term performance