Personal tools
You are here: Home → Philosophy → Introduction to Philosophy → Lecture 20 Notes

Lecture 20 Notes

Document Actions
  • Send this
  • Print this
  • Content View
  • Bookmarks
Review: Utilitarianism
    1. The Doctrine--An act is right if and only if there is no other act the agent could have performed that has higher utility.
    2. Utility = Units of happniess caused by an action minus units of unhappiness caused by an action.

The "Doctrine of Swine" Objection
    1. The Objection
      1. If utilitarianism is correct, then the only relevant moral consideration is the amount of pleasure.
      2. It is false that the only relevant moral consideration is the amount of pleasure.
        • Ex. Suppose that one inherits $100,000.  One could go spend it on great food, a new car, and an expensive wardrobe.  Or one could spend it on great works of philosophy and literature and take a year off of work to study.  The former would certainly bring one more pleasure but it isn't obvious that extravagant spending is the moral choice.
      3. Therefore, utilitarianism is false.
    2. Mill's Response
      1. Introduce a quality variable to pleasure.
      2. Pleasure has three dimensions: duration, intensity, and quality.  So when we are measuring the pleasure produced by an action, we not only look at the duration of the pleasure or the intenseity of the pleasure but also the quality of the pleasure.  It may be that studying brings us less intense pleasures than spending but they are longer in duration and higher in quality.
      3. Adding the quality dimension to pleasure differentiates the pleasures that are relevant to the morality of our actions from the pleasures of the swine.

The "Too High of Standard" Objection
    1. The Objection
      1. If utilitarianism is correct, then an act is right only if stems from a motive to promote the best interests of society.
      2. It is false that right acts must all stem from such a motive.
      3. Therefore, utilitarianism is false.
    2. Mill's Response
      1. Premise a is false; according to utilitarianism, motives are irrelevant to the morality of an action.  The only thing that is relevant is maximizing utility. 
      2. If we take consequentialism (the view that the morality of an action depends on the consequences of that action) seriously, then the morality of an action has to do with fulfilling our duty to maximize utility as opposed to having good motives to maximize utility.  For example, suppose that a doctor goes to a third world country because he wants to help fight disease A.  However, while he is there he unintentionally spreads a much worse disease, disease B.  According to utilitarianism, his good motive (wanting to help fight disease A) does not make his action moral as he failed to accomplish his duty (maximizing utility).

Further Difficulties
    1. The Objections
      1. Harming the Innocent--If utilitarianism is true, then it is sometimes moral to harm the innocent just in case doing so maximizes overall utility.
        • Possible Reply--The "Rawlsian" Alternative and the Moral Point of View--This incorporates a notion of justice in addition to utilitarianism.
      2. Trivial Acts--If utilitarianism is true, then there are no trivial acts (acts which have no moral value).  Every action is either moral or immoral.
        • Ex. Should you eat bacon or sausage for breakfast?  According to utilitarianism, you have a moral obligation to eat whichever one maximizes utility.
      3. Supererogatory Acts--If utilitarianism is true, there are no supererogatory acts (acts which exceed our moral obligations).  If an act is moral, it is a moral obligation.
        • Ex. You might have thought that giving money to famine relief is supererogatory.  But if it maximizes utility, you have a moral obligation to do so.
    2. Common Response
      1. The problems rest not with utilitarianism, but with our common moral attitudes.
      2. "Outsmarting" the Critics--A strategy for handling a problematic consequence for your theory in which you bite the bullet and accept the consequence.
Copyright 2008, by the Contributing Authors. Cite/attribute Resource. administrator. (2006, September 19). Lecture 20 Notes. Retrieved September 08, 2008, from Notre Dame OpenCourseWare Web site: http://ocw.nd.edu/philosophy/introduction-to-philosophy-2/Lecture%2020%20Notes.html. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Creative Commons License
Reuse Course
Download this course or reuse in OpenOCW.
Download this course
Export into OpenOCW