Upload
t0nywilliams
View
3.495
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Learning objectives:
To know the difference between Bentham’s Act Utilitarianism and Mill’s Rule
Utilitarianism
To begin to understand the requirements for writing an AS level essay with the focus on
AO1 objectives
Jeremy Bentham 1748-1832
Bentham believed that Nature had placed mankind under two sovereign masters – pleasure and pain
His hedonic calculus was designed to calculate the morality of an action
Hedonic Calculus
Bentham thought that an act’s utility could be measured by considering:
1. Intensity (how intense the pleasure will be)2. Duration (how long it will last)3. Propinquity (how near it is)4. Certainty (how certain that pleasure will result)5. Fecundity (how much it will lead to pleasure of the same type)6. Purity (how free from pain)7. Extent (how many will gain pleasure)
Problems
Can pleasure be calculated?
Are different pleasures commensurable?
• In the same person
• Between persons?
Are all pleasures ‘equal’ –
• Yes, says Bentham
• No, says Mill
Problems Can justify any indiscriminate act if it
leads to a desirable outcome for the majority eg Murder a patient for organs, sacrifice someone for the good of the majority
Can lead to persecution of minorities
Can lead to counter intuitive decisions being morally justified eg Torture/Rape etc
John Stuart Mill 1806-1873 Bentham’s Godson Mill believed that
quality was more important than quantity when it came to pleasure.
For example, the pleasures of the mind are far superior to the gratification of the body’s desires. This deals with the problem of sadistic torturers, as their pleasure is of a significantly lower kind.
Welovemoralissues.org
Name: John Stuart MillD.O.B: 20th May 1806Occupation: English Philosopher, Political theorist, Political economist and Member of ParliamentLikes: Long walks on the beach and lengthy discussions about morality.Dislikes: Strong spirits, fast food restaurants, trashy magazines and package holidays.Interested in: WomenRelationship status: Single
So here’s the story…
One day, as John was reading up on the responses to his blog: ‘welovemoralissues.org’, he came across a match.com ad. This enticed him as
he saw a picture alongside the popup of a dashing young woman. She called herself Linda. After they began to chat furiously over several
moral issues, Linda interrupted John, suggesting they meet over dinner. John contemplated the
moral consequences of this action for a moment, and quickly agreed. As long as it was fine dining it
was sure to be okay!
I believe that an act is right or wrong based on the principle of utility. However, I think that ‘the greatest good’ can be worked out through the definitions of higher and lower pleasures.
On the date…
So what we’re doing now, is it a higher or
lower pleasure?
A higher pleasure. Because not only are we developing our own unique human ability by developing our friendship (wink wink), we are also enjoying and appreciating fine food and drink which was created like a piece of artwork.
Later on…
Even later on…
And now?
Lower pleasure.
Mill Quote“Better to be a human
being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied… better to be Socrates dissatisfied
than a fool satisfied”
Act and Rule Utilitarianism
Act utilitarianism
Looks at the consequences
of each individual act and
calculates utility each time the
act is performed
Rule utilitarianism
Looks at the consequences
of having everyone follow a
particular rule and calculates
the overall utility of accepting
or rejecting the rule
An Example• Imagine the following scenario. A prominent and much-loved
leader has been rushed to the hospital, grievously wounded by an assassin’s bullet. He needs a heart and lung transplant immediately to survive. No suitable donors are available, but there is a homeless person in the emergency room who is being kept alive on a respirator, who probably has only a few days to live, and who is a perfect donor. Without the transplant, the leader will die; the homeless person will die in a few days anyway. Security at the hospital is very well controlled. The transplant team could hasten the death of the homeless person and carry out the transplant without the public ever knowing that they killed the homeless person for his organs. What should they do?
For rule utilitarians, this is an easy choice. No one could approve a general rule that lets hospitals kill patients for their organs when they are going to die anyway. The consequences of adopting such a general rule would be highly negative and would certainly undermine public trust in the medical establishment.
For act utilitarians, the situation is more complex. If secrecy were guaranteed, the overall consequences might be such that in this particular instance greater utility is produced by hastening the death of the homeless person and using his organs for the transplant.
Rule utilitarians claim:
In particular cases, act utilitarianism can justify disobeying important moral rules and violating individual rights.
Act utilitarianism also takes too much time to calculate in each and every case.
Act utilitarians respond:
Following a rule in a particular case when the overall utility demands that we violate the rule is just rule-worship. If the consequences demand it, we should violate the rule.
The Continuing Dispute
Essay - part a question
Give an account of Bentham’s Utilitarianism.
(30 marks)
Due: 21st October