John Stuart Mill Utilitarianism Introduction to Ethical Theory PHIL240: Week 4, Lecture 4 Benjamin Visscher Hole IV

Agenda Clicker Quiz Mill’s accounts of utilitarianism and justice

all the above. none of the above. Mill claims that one of the strongest objections to utilitarianism is drawn from the idea of: duty. justice. virtue. supererogation. all the above. none of the above.

Mill claims that in deciding how to act: we should perform the felicific calculus. we should always calculate the expected consequences of our action. we should depend on rules of thumb derived from the principle of utility. we should consult culture and tradition. all the above. none of the above.

According to Mill, the “ultimate sanction” of the principle of utility lies in: the felicific calculus. the commands of God. the threat of punishment. the conscientious feelings of mankind. the laws of Nature. all the above. none of the above.

Mill Competent Judges Test Utilitarianism Justice

Argument for Qualitative Hedonism Assignment Four … Therefore, higher pleasures are qualitatively more valuable than lower pleasures. Reconstruct in premise conclusion form.

Higher Pleasures (human/intellectual) “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied” Higher Pleasures (human/intellectual) vs. Lower Pleasures (animal/bodily)

Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied” Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

The Argument from Value Measurement Utilitarianism is true only if there is a precise unit of measurement that can determine the value of an action’s results. There is no such unit of measurement. Therefore, utilitarianism is false.

The Argument from Value Measurement Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

The Competent Judges Test Mill’s case for HP >. LP Competent judges are people who have experienced both higher and lower pleasures. They choose higher pleasures over the qualitatively different lower pleasures because the higher ones are qualitatively better. If someone chooses lower pleasures, he is not a competent judge (has not fully experienced the higher pleasure).

The Competent Judges Test Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Begging the Question “Literally, requisitioning what is sought, or at issue. So requesting an opponent to grant what the opponent seeks a proof of. So, by extension, assuming what is to be proven.” Honderich, Ted (ed.). The Oxford Companion to Philosophy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995)

The Competent Judges Test begs the question Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Mill’s utilitarianism The motives of the agent are relevant to assessing the moral worth of the agent, but not the morality of the action. “He who saves a fellow creature from drowning does what is morally right, whether his motive be duty or the hope of being paid for his trouble.” Whether an action is morally right depends solely on the consequences of the action.

Mill responds to critics … Objection Response Demandingness “there is not time, previous to action, for calculating and weighing the effects” “The answer to the objection is that there has been ample time, namely the whole past duration of the human species”

Mill’s utilitarianism Rules of Thumb - On the basis of human experience, we can derive rules of thumb about which kinds actions produce the best consequences. Whether an action is morally right depends solely on the consequences of the action.

Mill responds to critics … Objection Utilitarianism tells us to perform morally repugnant acts because it asks us to privilege the aggregate good over a just distribution. The correct moral theory will never require us to commit serious injustices. Utilitarianism sometimes requires us to commit serious injustices. ____________________ Therefore, utilitarianism is not the correct moral theory.

Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree Utilitarianism is not a plausible ethical theory because it sometimes requires serious injustices. Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Rule Consequentialism “RC An action is right if and only if (and because) it is permitted by a rule whose associated acceptance value is at least as high as the acceptance value of any other rule applying to the situation” (Timmons, 10). Mill’s response to the objection: rules of thumb This seems to solve the problem ...

Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree “RC : An action is right if and only if (and because) it is permitted by a rule whose associated acceptance value is at least as high as the acceptance value of any other rule applying to the situation” (Timmons, 10). Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Rules and Justice Imperfect duties Rules in which the particular occasion of performing is left to our choice. Example: Charity Perfect duties Rules in virtue of which a correlative right resides in some person or persons. Example: Property Justice corresponds to our perfect duties. The content of our perfect duties is fixed by the principle of utility. 23

The Collapse of Rule Consequentialism Does RC admit exception cases? If yes If no Distribution objection Rule Worship

The Collapse of Rule Consequentialism “Either rule-consequentialism collapses into practical equivalence with the simpler act-consequentialism, or rule-consequentialism is incoherent.” (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism-rule/) If RC collapses, it is not a viable ethical theory. It is not a different theory than act consequentialism (and therefore also vulnerable to the same objections). If RC is incoherent, it is not a viable ethical theory. It depends on a theory of The Right; it takes a system or rules as primary and not value (pleasure). Therefore, RC is not a viable ethical theory.

Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree “RC : An action is right if and only if (and because) it is permitted by a rule whose associated acceptance value is at least as high as the acceptance value of any other rule applying to the situation” (Timmons, 10). Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree