1. Preference Utilitarianism

2. Learning Objectives By the end of this lesson, we will have... Consolidated our knowledge of Act and Rule Utilitarianism by comparing (in detail) Act and Rule Utilitarianism. Consolidated our knowledge of Act and Rule Utilitarianism by comparing (in detail) Act and Rule Utilitarianism. Discussed Preference Utilitarianism. Discussed Preference Utilitarianism. Applied Preference Utilitarianism to ethical dilemmas. Applied Preference Utilitarianism to ethical dilemmas.

3. Key Words Utilitarianism - ethical theory by which actions are judged according to their anticipated results. Utilitarianism - ethical theory by which actions are judged according to their anticipated results. Act utilitarianism- utilitarian theory applied to the results of individual actions. Act utilitarianism- utilitarian theory applied to the results of individual actions. Rule utilitarianism- utilitarian theory that takes into account the results of obeying general rules of conduct. Rule utilitarianism- utilitarian theory that takes into account the results of obeying general rules of conduct. Preference utilitarianism- utilitarian theory that takes into account the preferences of all those involved in a particular course of action. Preference utilitarianism- utilitarian theory that takes into account the preferences of all those involved in a particular course of action.

4. Consequentialism Consequentialism is the theory that the moral status of an act is determined by its consequences. Consequentialism is the theory that the moral status of an act is determined by its consequences. Consequentialism thus rejects both the virtue ethicist’s view that the moral status of an act is determined by the moral character of the agent performing it, and the deontologist’s view that the moral status of an act is determined by the type of act that it is. Consequentialism thus rejects both the virtue ethicist’s view that the moral status of an act is determined by the moral character of the agent performing it, and the deontologist’s view that the moral status of an act is determined by the type of act that it is. According to consequentialism, each of these factors is morally irrelevant. All that matters is what consequences an act leads to. According to consequentialism, each of these factors is morally irrelevant. All that matters is what consequences an act leads to.

5. Act vs. Rule Task: 10 minutes Use class notes and text book to complete the Act vs. Rule table. Use class notes and text book to complete the Act vs. Rule table. Complete it in detail. Complete it in detail. It will be a useful revision aid. It will be a useful revision aid.

6. Preference Utilitarianism It is associated with R.M Hare, Peter Singer and Richard Brandt. It is associated with R.M Hare, Peter Singer and Richard Brandt. Definition: moral actions are right or wrong according to how they fit the preferences of those involved. Definition: moral actions are right or wrong according to how they fit the preferences of those involved. An Act utilitarian judges right or wrong according to the maximising of pleasure and minimising of pain. An Act utilitarian judges right or wrong according to the maximising of pleasure and minimising of pain. A Rule utilitarian judges right or wrong according to the keeping of rules derived from utility. A Rule utilitarian judges right or wrong according to the keeping of rules derived from utility. BUT, a preference utilitarian judges moral actions according to whether they fit in which the preferences of the individuals involved. BUT, a preference utilitarian judges moral actions according to whether they fit in which the preferences of the individuals involved. This approach asks:  ‘What is in my own interest?’  ‘What would I prefer in this situation?’  ‘Which outcome would I prefer?’  However, because Utilitarianism is concerned with the greatest good for the greatest number, it is necessary to consider the preferences of others in order to achieve this.

7. R.M. Hare He argues that in moral decision making we need to consider our own preferences and those of others. He argues that in moral decision making we need to consider our own preferences and those of others. He says that “equal preferences count equally, whatever their content”. He says that “equal preferences count equally, whatever their content”. People are happy when they get what they prefer, but what we prefer may clash with the preferences of others. People are happy when they get what they prefer, but what we prefer may clash with the preferences of others. He says we need to “stand in someone else’s shoes”, and try to imagine what someone else may prefer. He says we need to “stand in someone else’s shoes”, and try to imagine what someone else may prefer. We should treat everyone, including ourselves, with impartiality- he also argues for universalisability (what is right or wrong for one person in a situation is right or wrong for all). We should treat everyone, including ourselves, with impartiality- he also argues for universalisability (what is right or wrong for one person in a situation is right or wrong for all).

8. Preference Utilitarianism In preference utilitarianism, the assessment of a situation takes into account the preferences of the individuals involved, except where those preferences come into direct conflict with the preferences of others. In preference utilitarianism, the assessment of a situation takes into account the preferences of the individuals involved, except where those preferences come into direct conflict with the preferences of others. So, the right thing to do in any situation is to maximise the satisfaction of the So, the right thing to do in any situation is to maximise the satisfaction of the preferences of all those involved. preferences of all those involved. This gets around the problem of using utilitarianism to impose one idea of happiness on someone who might have a very different one. This gets around the problem of using utilitarianism to impose one idea of happiness on someone who might have a very different one.

9. Preference Utilitarianism All forms of utilitarianism hold that we ought to maximise the good and minimise the bad. Where the different forms of utilitarianism differ is in what they take to be the good and the bad. All forms of utilitarianism hold that we ought to maximise the good and minimise the bad. Where the different forms of utilitarianism differ is in what they take to be the good and the bad. Preference utilitarianism holds that the good is preference satisfaction, i.e. getting what we want, and that the bad is the opposite, i.e. not getting what we want. People may be mistaken about what will make them happy. Preference utilitarianism holds that the good is preference satisfaction, i.e. getting what we want, and that the bad is the opposite, i.e. not getting what we want. People may be mistaken about what will make them happy. For Example… It may be that you think that going to the pub and downing six pints of lager will make you happy, but that you would actually be happier staying at home and reading Dostoyevsky. It may be that you think that going to the pub and downing six pints of lager will make you happy, but that you would actually be happier staying at home and reading Dostoyevsky. In such a case, the hedonistic utilitarian would say that it is better if you stay at home and read Dostoyevsky; that, after all, is what will make you happiest. In such a case, the hedonistic utilitarian would say that it is better if you stay at home and read Dostoyevsky; that, after all, is what will make you happiest. The preference utilitarian, though, would say that it is better if you go to the pub; that is what you want to do, and what matters is that you get what you want. The preference utilitarian, though, would say that it is better if you go to the pub; that is what you want to do, and what matters is that you get what you want.

10. Peter Singer He says “our own preferences cannot count any more than the preferences of others’ and so, in acting morally, we should take account of all the people affected by our actions. He says “our own preferences cannot count any more than the preferences of others’ and so, in acting morally, we should take account of all the people affected by our actions. These have to be weighed and balanced and then we must choose the action which gives the best possible consequences for those affected. These have to be weighed and balanced and then we must choose the action which gives the best possible consequences for those affected. However, preference utilitarians interpret the best consequences in terms of 'preference satisfaction'. This means that 'good' is described as the satisfaction of each person's individual preferences or desires, and a right action is that which leads to this satisfaction. However, preference utilitarians interpret the best consequences in terms of 'preference satisfaction'. This means that 'good' is described as the satisfaction of each person's individual preferences or desires, and a right action is that which leads to this satisfaction. Since what is good depends solely on individual preferences, there can be nothing that is in itself good or bad except for the resulting state of mind. Preference utilitarianism therefore can be distinguished by its acknowledgement that every person's experience of satisfaction will be unique. Since what is good depends solely on individual preferences, there can be nothing that is in itself good or bad except for the resulting state of mind. Preference utilitarianism therefore can be distinguished by its acknowledgement that every person's experience of satisfaction will be unique.

11. Singer For Singer, the ‘best possible consequences’ means what is the ‘best interests of the individuals concerned- this is different from Bentham and Mill, as he is not considering what increases pleasure and diminishes pain. For Singer, the ‘best possible consequences’ means what is the ‘best interests of the individuals concerned- this is different from Bentham and Mill, as he is not considering what increases pleasure and diminishes pain. The principle of equal consideration acts like a pair of scales- everyone’s preferences are weighed equally. The principle of equal consideration acts like a pair of scales- everyone’s preferences are weighed equally. So, killing a person who prefers to go on living would be wrong and not killing a person who prefers to die would also be wrong. So, killing a person who prefers to go on living would be wrong and not killing a person who prefers to die would also be wrong. Racism is also wrong, as it goes against the principle of acknowledging other person’s interests or preferences and gives greater value to the preferences of one’s own race. Racism is also wrong, as it goes against the principle of acknowledging other person’s interests or preferences and gives greater value to the preferences of one’s own race.

12. Utilitarianism in practice Imagine a doctor is called the scene of an accident and is required to set a broken bone and perform other emergency procedures. Imagine a doctor is called the scene of an accident and is required to set a broken bone and perform other emergency procedures. His action is almost certain to cause additional pain to the one injured. His action is almost certain to cause additional pain to the one injured. Is that pain good or bad? Is that pain good or bad? Well, since short term pain is outweighed by the long-term good of having limbs that grow straight. Well, since short term pain is outweighed by the long-term good of having limbs that grow straight. If you cause pain in the process of saving a life, utilitarianism argues that action can be judged good. If you cause pain in the process of saving a life, utilitarianism argues that action can be judged good.

13. Terminology Test Explain the following key ideas without looking at your books and notes: - 1. Consequentialist? 2. Teleological ethics? 3. Act Utilitarian? 4. Rule Utilitarian? 5. Preference Utilitarian? 6. Universalisability? 7. Principle of Utility? 8. Hedonism?

14. Terms- Discuss 1. Consequentialist- someone who decides whether an action is good or bad by its consequences. 2. Teleological ethics- moral actions are right or wrong according to their outcome or teleos (end). 3. Act Utilitarian- a teleological theory that uses the outcome of an action to determine whether it is good or bad. 4. Rule Utilitarian- establishing a general rule that follows utilitarian principles. 5. Preference Utilitarian- moral actions are right or wrong according to how they fit the preferences of those involved. 6. Universalisability- what is right or wrong for one person in a situation is right or wrong for all. 7. Principle of Utility- the theory of usefulness- the greatest happiness for the greatest number. 8. Hedonism- view that pleasure is the chief good.

15. Abortion, euthanasia, Infanticide Consistent with his general ethical theory, Singer holds that the right to life is grounded in a being's personhood; that is, in the sense of a being's rationality and self-consciousness. In his view, the central argument against abortion is equivalent to the following logical syllogism: Consistent with his general ethical theory, Singer holds that the right to life is grounded in a being's personhood; that is, in the sense of a being's rationality and self-consciousness. In his view, the central argument against abortion is equivalent to the following logical syllogism: It is wrong to kill an innocent human being. A human foetus is an innocent human being. Therefore it is wrong to kill a human foetus. It is wrong to kill an innocent human being. A human foetus is an innocent human being. Therefore it is wrong to kill a human foetus. His argument against this is to say that, while a foetus is admittedly a member of the human species, it is not a person, which is defined as a self conscious being that sees itself over time. Species membership is morally irrelevant, but personhood is relevant. His argument against this is to say that, while a foetus is admittedly a member of the human species, it is not a person, which is defined as a self conscious being that sees itself over time. Species membership is morally irrelevant, but personhood is relevant. Singer classifies euthanasia as voluntary, involuntary, or non- voluntary. Voluntary euthanasia is that with the consent of the subject. Singer classifies euthanasia as voluntary, involuntary, or non- voluntary. Voluntary euthanasia is that with the consent of the subject.

16. Practical Application TASK (10 mins) What is the utilitarian stance on:- Euthanasia Euthanasia Fertility Treatment Fertility Treatment Embryo Research Embryo Research Abortion Abortion Genetic Engineering Genetic Engineering

17. Utilitarian Ethics Euthanasia Would allow it, under strictly controlled conditions. May not be greatest good for greatest number if the innocent in society are threatended.Could save money, which could be used to benefit others.Often leave the weak minority vulnerable to abuse. Fertility Treatment Would allow most forms of fertility treatment. Does not see human life as sacred, so spare embryos are not a problem. In favour of regulation to prevent abuse. Embryo Research In favour of research if the majority will benefit. Embryo is regarded as a commodity- has not religious significance. Abortion Is acceptable. Benefit seen in terms of avoiding dangers of back street abortions. Unwanted children should not be born. Only the already born are taken into consideration. Genetic Engineering In favour or research, as majority could benefit.

18. Next Lesson PracticeTest Revise your notes and you will be fine.