Utilitarianism Teleological Ethics

Teleological Ethics Teleological ethics- To judge whether an action is moral by purely looking at the result or consequence of the action. This is also known as consequentialism. Deontological Teleological Absolutism Relativism

Teleological Ethics In teleological ethics there are no moral absolutes. Actions have only “instrumental” value not “intrinsic” value. Intrinsic value- Valued for its own sake Instrumental value- Valued because they let us achieve something we want. You can argue that some actions are both Eg. Education is good in itself and helps you achieve something. A teleologist would only be interested in the instrumental value.

Teleological Ethics A neighbour put the heating on for a family who were away, as a surprise, and it burned down the house. How would we judge this in a teleological way? Was it a good or bad action? (example from Rosenstand) Exam tip- Be careful not to use case studies out of context, the house example is not a dilemma that teleological ethics are designed to solve.

The Principle of Utility A principle of utility is a way of measuring how useful an action is in bringing about the consequences that we desire. How useful would lying be to save my life in X situation. In order to decide on your principle of utility you must decide on the consequence that you desire. They you can assess how useful certain acts will be to bring about this consequence.

The Principle of Utility For utilitarianism the principle of utility is “the greatest happiness for the greatest number” So the “right” action is whatever works for the general (greater) good. “What could be more plausible than that the right is to promote the general good-that our actions and our rules, if we must have rules, are to be decided upon by determining which of them produces or may be expected to produce the greatest balance of good over evil?” (page 82) Frankena) sadism

German 'cannibal' charged with murder The crime was allegedly carried out with the victim's consent A German man who confessed to killing and eating a man he met through a website for cannibals has been charged with murder, prosecutors have said. The 41-year-old suspect, identified as Armin M, is alleged to have killed the 43-year-old victim in March 2001 in the town of Rotenburg in central Germany, after meeting him through the site. He then carved up and froze portions of the man's flesh, later eating some of it, prosecutors allege. The crime was apparently carried out with the victim's full consent, however state prosecutor Hans-Manfred Jung told French news agency AFP that the victim's supposed "death wish" did not change the fact that the killer had wanted to commit murder. The suspect's arrest in December last year caused a sensation in Germany, as the country's tabloids competed to report the most grisly details of the case.

The Principle of Utility Happiness or Pleasure We have to decide on our principle of utility (what is the moral meaning of life?) What is good about choosing happiness as our measure? What is bad about choosing happiness? Would justice be better? Why? Why Not? (use page 82, 2nd paragraph)

The Principle of Utility Happiness or pleasure Happiness Universally valued and desirable Subjective Open to abuse

The Principle of Utility Hedonism Pleasure or happiness is the same as “good” in the following examples: Psychological Hedonism- Pleasure is the only thing we want. Evaluative Hedonism- Pleasure is what we should want. Rationalising hedonism- Pleasure is the only thing that we should want. It is the meaning of life. Utilitarianism was originally associated with the first of these…

Psychological Hedonism Bentham believed that people are motivated by the desire for pleasure and the seeking the absence from pain. These two factors determine how people act. Bentham reasoned that ethics was a science. Good, he claimed, could be scientifically proven according to the principle of utility.

Pre- Utilitarianism Before Utilitarianism people were already using consequentialist ethics In 1751 Hume (Bentham was 3) concluded that virtue consisted of the qualities that are most useful to ourselves and others. Eg. Generosity, patience etc… This is why we use the word utility because utilitarianism was about determining what is useful and this becomes morally right.

Pre- Utilitarianism Hume linked utility with happiness “Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do as well as what we shall do.” Hume

Pre Utilitarianism It Is difficult to define happiness Aristotle saw no difference between living well (flourishing) and living morally. Wellbeing is part of the “good life.” This can include comfort and enjoyment.

The Hedonic (felicific) Calculus Bentham proposed that you could calculate the amount of pleasure and pain caused by an action by using the Hedonic Calculus.

The Hedonic or Felicific Calculus Bentham reacted strongly against a rule based approach to ethics. He did not want to be told what to do by:- The Church Bible Natural law Conscience Instead he proposed using a simple mathematical calculation which an individual could use in order to work out which decision could promote the greatest pleasure for the greatest number of people

The Hedonic or Felicific Calculus Felicific comes from the Latin meaning fruitful. This calculation was both egalitarian and democratic. “Everybody is to count for one, and nobody for more than one.” Bentham

The Hedonic Calculus Bentham’s calculus takes into account seven criteria: Duration- how long does it last? Intensity- how intense is it? Propinquity- how near is it? Extent- how widely does it cover? Certainty- how sure are we that it will come? Purity- how free from pain is it? Fecundity- likely to lead to further pleasures These criteria allow the amount of happiness created by an action to be assessed and calculated in order to judge its moral content.

Bentham’s mnemonic “Intense, long, certain, speedy, fruitful, pure, such marks in pleasures and in pain endure. Such pleasures seek if private by thy end: If it be public, wide let them extend. Such pains avoid, whichever be thy view: If pain must come, let them extend few.”

Criticisms of Bentham You cannot reduce morality to a mathematical equation. It does not take into account that some pleasures are universally bad. “So long as they promise the best consequences…it would forbid absolutely nothing: not rape, not torture, not even murder” (Philip Pettit) Pettit did concede that this criticism is only true in “horrendous circumstances” and that Utilitarianism was designed to answer moral dilemmas concerning “greatest number” and it succeeds at this. So there can be exceptions to the principle of utility but these are rare. Look at the skiing example of a good use of utilitarianism on page 83 paragraph 3. Mill- you should consider the quality of the happiness as well as the quantity. Mill- Bentham does not place sufficient value on justice.