1. J.S. Mill, Utilitarianism (1863) PHIL 102, UBC Summer 2015 Christina Hendricks Except parts noted otherwise, this presentation is licensed CC-BY 4.0CC-BY 4.0

2. John Stuart Mill (1806-1873, England) Mill “had a lifelong goal of reforming the world in the interest of human well- being” http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mill / http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mill /

3. When asking what is right/wrong morally, what to evaluate? Person Action Consequences Intention Motive Habitual disposition to act in some ways What kind of act is it? What was actually done? What results from the action?

4. Consequentialism “whether an act is morally right depends only on consequences (as opposed to the …intrinsic nature of the act or anything that happens before the act).” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on consequentialism: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/#ClaUti

5. Hedonistic consequentialism Value hedonism: “all and only pleasure is intrinsically valuable and all and only pain is intrinsically disvaluable.” -- Internet Encycl. of Philo: http://www.iep.utm.edu/hedonism/#SH1b http://www.iep.utm.edu/hedonism/#SH1b Hedonistic consequentialism: determine the moral value of consequences, and therefore of acts, by how much pleasure/pain produced

6. Some moral scenarios http://is.gd/PHIL102Mill A few different moral scenarios, to encourage you to think about what might be needed to say an action is morally right or wrong…

7. Utilitarianism, Chpt 1

8. Simplified overview of Mill’s Utilitarianism We can judge the moral value of actions by the degree of happiness they tend to produce for the sentient creatures involved

9. Greatest Happiness Principle “actions are [morally] right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, [morally] wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (2). “happiness” is defined in terms of pleasure and reduction or absence of pain

10. Support for GHP (more in Chpt. IV) “pleasure, and freedom from pain, are the only things desirable as ends” (2) Mill on the highest good (5) The “end of human action is necessarily also the standard of morality” (5) Pleasure, reduction of pain (self & others)

11. Pleasure as only intrinsic value (p. 2, & Chpt 4) Use happiness, defined in terms of pleasure, to evaluate consequences of acts Judge acts with Greatest Happiness Principle (GHP) Actual consequences the act had? What was intended as consequence? Usual consequences for this kind of act?

12. Consequences for whom? Sentient beings (5) Not the whole world for all actions (6) Impartiality (5)

13. Different kinds of pleasures Mill distinguishes between different kinds of pleasures: what kinds, and why does he make this distinction?

14. How do we know pleasures differ in kind, not just quantity? (3-4) Even if you could get the sensual pleasures nearly or fully satisfied, a life with the capacity for intellectual pleasures but with less of them would still be preferable. Sensual only (pig and fool)Sensual & intellectual (human & Socrates)

15. Role of motive Motive doesn’t matter to the morality of actions (6) Still, we should try to get people to want to promote general happiness (5-6)

16. Do we have to calculate consequences each time we act? No; we can use “subordinate principles” from the “fundamental principle” (GHP) (9) These are drawn from human experience of which kinds of actions tend to promote more/less pleasure & pain (8)

17. Pleasure as only intrinsic value Use happiness, defined in terms of pleasure, to evaluate conseq. of acts Greatest Happiness Principle (GHP) Subordinate principles (moral rules) (8-9) Act R/W? GHP used to determine subordinate rules, decide between them if they conflict re: an action

18. Chpt V: Utilitarianism & Justice Two questions addressed here: 1.What differentiates justice from the rest of morality? 2. Would utilitarianism allow people to act unjustly if that would promote more happiness in a group overall?

19. Question 1: Moral categories Morally obligatory/required What must be done Morally obligatory/required What must be done Morally permissible/optional What can be done Morally permissible/optional What can be done Morally prohibited What must not be done Morally prohibited What must not be done Supererogatory praiseworthy but optional Supererogatory praiseworthy but optional

20. What promotes general happiness, and What people should be compelled to do or avoid (19) o How decide what actions should be compelled? What promotes happiness, but people should not be compelled to do or avoid (19) o Though we can try to persuade Examples ? Morality/duty Prudence/expedienc e

21. Morality Duties of perfect obligation (20) Connected to one or more rights o How determine what counts as a right? Justice/rights focus on security: “the most vital of all interests” (21) Duties of imperfect obligation (20) Not connected to rights Example: generosity Justice Rest of morality

22. Must we maximize happiness? For Mill, is it morally required to produce as much happiness as possible, in all actions? No, according to other writings See also p. 20

23. Refined way of defining acts as morally right/wrong What produces general happiness (GHP) What we should compel people to do or avoid

24. Question 2:

25. Still… Are there exceptions to rules of justice? Yes and no… (22)

26. Act vs Rule utilitarianism A distinction that didn’t exist when Mill was writing AU: moral value of acts judged by utility of consequences of those (kinds of) acts RU: moral value of acts judged by whether they follow rules; rules judged by utility of their consequences if generally accepted and/or followed

27. Act utilitarianismRule utilitarianism Principle of utility (e.g., Mill’s GHP) Act R/W? Principle of utility (e.g., Mill’s GHP) Act R/W? Rules with high acceptance and/or obedience utility Act R/W?