1. Philosophy 2030
Class #11
4/12/16
Take-home / open book midterm
exam is available on Quia for
download and printing. Exam is due
on 4/19. Use the answer sheets
handed out (blue side).

2. Bentham’s Utilitarianism
Problems with
Bentham’s Utilitarianism
First of all, what are consequences anyway? They only happen after we take action. They are hypothetical.
Thus, an action cannot be said to be moral or not until the consequences are known. Intentions don’t count.
But how long do we have to wait? With many moral choices, all the consequences are not ever known.
Thus, can we not ever say if the act is good or not? 2

3. & The Problem of Sheer Numbers!
If we are applying the greatest happiness principle,
would it be moral then to abuse a few individuals for
the enjoyment or welfare of the many?
Human experiments?
Animal experiments?
Stem cell research?
Snuff films?
Dog fights?
Human Torture? Abu Ghraib?

4. Or The Hedonist Paradox
The Happiness Paradox,
Or The Hedonist Paradox
We often found happiness only when we are searching for something else. The more we seem to value pleasure for itself, the more it seems to elude us.
Remember what Aristotle said….
In response to Bentham, John Stuart Mill takes a page from Aristotle’s playbook and claims that happiness is an intellectual achievement, not merely pleasure.
(By the way, if you were wondering who was the first philosopher to stress the important difference between factual and normative statements and that one cannot think critically about ethics without keeping this difference clear, it was John Stuart Mill. -- Reread Box 5.7)

5. Video:
Does the End Justify the Means / How Do Consequences Make Actions Right?
(#19)

6. John Stuart Mill
( )
The Utilitarianism approach of Bentham and the greatest happiness principle is deeply flawed.
“Ask yourself whether you are happy and you cease to be so.”
Mill argued that you cannot simply identify pleasure with good and evil with pain. The Hedonistic Calculus program does not work.
Mill proposed a version of utilitarianism that did not fall back on hedonism. There are higher and lower pleasures. Intellectual values drive us to
the higher pleasures.

7. A Revision of Utilitarianism
John Stuart Mill:
A Revision of Utilitarianism
Bentham’s view does not adequately inform us as to what pleasure and pain is.
Yes, maximimizing pleasure for the common good depends on social equality, but such cannot be achieved without proper education
The greatest pleasures are “acquired tastes,” the joy of solving a mathematical problem, of writing an opera, of playing a violin, etc.
“It is better to be a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied, better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.” 7

8. Higher & Lower Pleasures
John Stuart Mill
Higher & Lower Pleasures
Thus for J.S. Mill, some pleasures are of more value than other pleasures! Humans will prefer pleasures that maintain some form of dignity.
Mill proposes a test to determine which is the higher pleasure: ask those who have experienced both!
The text questions Mill’s consistency in following
through with this test however and charges that Mill is less of a liberal than Bentham and suggests that he becomes an “elitist?” What do you think?
Mill asserts that the capability to enjoy the higher pleasures can be lost over time by neglect.

9. Higher & Lower Pleasures
John Stuart Mill’s
Higher & Lower Pleasures
The greatest pleasures are “acquired tastes” and derive from achievement -- the joy of solving a mathematical problem, of writing an opera, of playing a violin, etc.
Thus, Mill emphasized the necessary role of education for all. Social equality is achieved by providing opportunity for all to achieve the highest pleasures, not everybody settling for the lower pleasures. 9

10. John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle
Mill respected the liberal views of Bentham and his own father.
Yet, Mill also proposed views that today we would call libertarian or even conservative. Mill strongly favored limiting government
In particular, Mill warned of the “tyranny of the majority” in which a minority can be oppressed by a democratic majority.
Thus, Mill’s Harm Principle states that no mentally competent adult should be forced to be subject to other’s tastes, even if they are not in the majority, as long as they do no harm to others. 10

11. John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle
This view may appear contradictory with his earlier view of general education.
What Mill is saying is that we should educate all to give them the opportunity to achieve, but ultimately if they choose not to have the values that their education encouraged them to have, no compulsion should be advanced to make them live by any values other than the ones they choose for themselves.
Thus, Mill would likely argue on the matter of “same sex marriage” that we (even if we are the majority) should “mind our own business!”
But what about the teenage girl who wishes to commit suicide because she is pregnant? Should we “mind our own business” on this, or should we intervene on the basis that she is committing harm to others? 11

12. Act vs. Rule Utilitarianism
Utilitarians after John Stuart Mill have clarified Mill’s position by differentiating Act Utilitarianism from Rule Utilitarianism.
Act Utilitarianism says that one should: Always do whatever act will create the greatest happiness for the greater number of people.
Act Utilitarianism seems to suggest that it would be right to abuse individuals for the sake of the common good.
Rule Utilitarianism says that one should: Always do whatever type of act will create the greatest happiness for the greater number of people.
Thus, rule utilitarianism suggests that a pattern or rule of abusing individuals for the sake of the common good is not right. 12