Utilitarianism
- Created by: _Holly98
- Created on: 06-12-15 21:01
TYPES OF UTILITARIANISM
ACT - BENTHAM
RULE - MILL
PREFERENCE - SINGER
BENTHAM - ACT
- 1748 - 1832
- WHERE JUSTICE WAS RETRIBUTIVE WANTED TO SEE IT REFORMING AND ACTING DETERRENCE
- ACT - SITUATION ASSESED SEPERATLEY
- QUANTITIVE - ALL PLEASURE SAME VALUE
- REDUCE PAIN BEFORE INCREASING PLEASURE
HEDONISM
- HUMAN DESIRE SEEK PLEASURE AVOID PAIN
- PLEASURE & HAPPINESS ONLY GOOD STRIVE
- "NATURE PLACED MANKING UNDER THE GOVERNANCY OF TWO SOVEREIGN MASTERS, PLAIN AND PLEASURE"
- "ALL HUMANS MOTIVATED PAIN & PLEASURE
- "RIGHT ACTIONS PROMOTE MOST GOOD"
- SUBJECTIVE - WHAT IS RIGHT GOOD?
- G.E. MOORE WE INTUITVLEY KNOW GOOD BUT IT IS DIFFERENT FOR EVERYONE
THE HEDONIC CALCULUS
PURITY - HOW FREE FROM PAIN IT IS
REMOTENESS - HOW NEAR IT IS
RICHNESS - TO WHAT EXTENT WILL IT LEAD OTHER PLEASURE
INTENSITY - HOW POWERFUL
CERTAINTY - HOW LIKELY IS IT RESULT IN PLEASURE
EXTENT - HOW MANY PEOPLE DOES IT EFFECT
DURATION - HOW LONG WILL IT LAST
STRENGTHS
OBJECTIVE - CAN MEASURE POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ACTIONS
DEMOCRATIC
GREATEST GOOD - MORE PEOPLE HAPPY
WEAKNESS
QUANTIVIE CANT MEASURE HOW MUCH PLEASURE GAINED
PREDICTED VALUE - NOT EVERYTHING CAN BE PREDICTED E.G. CHILD LIFE SAVED DONT KNOW IF IT WILL GROW UP HAPPY
WHAT COUNTS AS PLEASURE? INCREASE PAIN TO REACH PLEASURE
TYRANY OF MAJORITY - MOST SAY ONE THING - AFFECT OTHERS
PRINCIPLE OF UTILITY
"GREATEST GOOD FOR THE GREATEST NUMBER
MEANS USEFULNESS
"THAT PROPERTY IN ANY OBJECT, WHEREBY IT TENDS TO PRODUCE BENEFIT, ADVANTAGE, PLEASURE GOOD OR HAPPINESS
EVERY PERSON PLEASURE SAME VALUE
"EACH TO COUNT FOR ONE AND NO MORE THAN ONE"
MILLS CRITICISM ON BENTHAM
QUANTITIVE - SOME PLEASURE MORE VALUABLE
MINORITIES - ONLY ACT PLEASURE IF NO ONE IS HARMED
TIME CONSUMING - NEED GENERAL RULE APPLY TO SITATUATIONS
JOHN STUART MILL
QUALITIVE
HEDONIST BUT STRESSED HAPPINESS OVER PLEASURE
"ACTIONS ARE RIGHT IN PROPORTION AS THEY TEN TO PROMOTE HAPPINESS"
HIGHER & LOWER PLEASURES
"BETTER TO BE A HUMAN DISATISFIED THAN A PIG SATISFIED
HIGHER & LOWER PLEASURES
"SOME KINDS OF PLEASURE MORE DESIRABLE THAN OTHERS"
HIGHER - UNIQUE HUMANS
"HUMAN BEINGS HAVE MORE ANIMAL DESIRES AND ONCE WE KNOW THAT WE NOT REGARD ANYTHING HAS TRUE HAPPINESS THAT INCLUDE SATISIFACTION OF THOSE DESIRES"
LOWER - PURSUE BODILY PLEASURE E.G. EATING
UNVERSALIABILITY
"EACH PERSON HAPPINES IS A GOOD TO THAT PERSON AND THE GENERAL HAPPINESS, THEREFORE IS A GOOD TO THE AGGREAGATE OF ALL PERSONS"
RIGHT & WRONG SAME FOR EVERYONE
EACH PERSON AIM FOR HAPPINESS
"IN EVERYTHING DO TO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO TO YOU; FOR THIS IS THE LAW OF THE PROHPHETS
MILL & RULES
NEED PRINCIPLE TRUTHFULNESS
CAN BE BROKEN: INFO USED FOR EVIL OR WITHOLD WITH FEAR MAKING SOMEONE UNHAPPY
MILL CONSIDERED DIRECT RESULTS INDIVIDUAL ACT
GENERAL GOOD SCOEITY
"THE CONSCIENTIOUS FEELINGS OF MANKIND"
PREFERENCE UTILITARINAISM
"I APPROACH EACH ISSUE BY SEEKING SOLOUSTION THAT HAS BEST CONSEQUENCES FOR ALL"
HAVE ANYTHING EXTRA SACRAFICE
"AN ACTION CONTRATY TO THE PREFERENCE OF ANY BEING IS UNLESS OUTWEIGHED BY CONTRARY PREFERENCES IS WRONG"
KILLING PERSON WHO WANTS TO LIVE IS WRONG
KILLING A PERSON WHO WANTS TO DIE IS RIGHT AS WE ARE ALL EQUAL & HAVE PREFERENCES
UTILITY IS DEICIDING PRINCIPLE
HOW DOES IT WORK
TAKE IMPARTIAL VIEW AS IMPARTIAL SPECTATOR
OWN PREFERENCE CANT TAKE PRIORITY
PREFERENCES OF ALL INVOLVED CONSIDERED
STRICT EQUALITY
ANIMAL LIBERATION
APPROVES BENTHAM "THE QUESTION IS NOT AN THEY REASON? NOR CAN THEY TALK? BUT THE CAN SUFFER?
MILL: "STANDARD MORALITY... SO FAR AS NATURE OF THINGS TO PERMITS TO THE WHOLE OF SENTINENT CREATION"
SINGER ACCORDS ANIMAL RIGHTS AS SENTINENT AS THEY HAVE VALID INTERESTS
EATING MEAT, CONSUMING BATTER FARMED EGGS = WRONG
POND SHOE SCENARIO
STRENGTHS
SECULAR - DOESNT RELY SPECIFIC BELIEFS - USEFUL MODERN DAY
DEMOCRATIC - BALANCE EVERYONES INTEREST
UNIVERSAL - CULTURE HAS OWN RULES DEONTOLOGICAL THEORIES ARE WRONG ABOUT UNIERSAL BUT PRINCIPLE OF UTILITY REDUCE HARM INCREASE HAPPINESS IS UNIVERSAL
OBJECTIVE - POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE CAN BE MEASURED
WEAKNESS
INCALCUABLE - EVEN IF PLEASURE NUMERICAL VALUE CANT ADD IT ALL
UNPREDICTABLE - DONT KNOW WHAT HAPPENS IN FUTURE
IMMEASURABLE - CANT ASSIGN VALUE PLEASURE - IMPOSSIBLE COMPARE
MECHANICAL - REDUCE MORALITY TO MATHS - LOSES SENSE OF WHATS VALUABLE
WRONG - SOMETIMES NOT BAD UNLESS EXPOSED
SHOULD DOCTORS BE PERMITTED TO KILL HUMANS?
DOCTORS WITHOLD TREATMENT TERMINALLY ILL
CRULER EUTHANASIA
NEW BORN LITTLE ETHICAL SIGNIFICANCE
"NEW BORN LESS VALUE LIFE...THE GROUNDS FOR NOT KILLING PERSON DONT APPLY NEW BORNS"
SINGER SUGGEST "RECOGNIZE VALUE HUMAN LIFE VARIES"
PROBLEMS
DAVID NORTON - MILL STANDARD TOO HIGH - MORALITY IS STEP BY STEP
ONLY MORAL ELITE CAPABLE SACRAFISE & MAXIMISING PREFERENCES
OUR GENEREAL DUTY IS DEVELOP MORAL CAPACITY - EXPERIENCE GREATER HAPPINESS
SO BETTER EPOUSE THEORY MORAL PROGRESS THAN SINGERS
Related discussions on The Student Room
- OCR A Level Religious Studies Religion and ethics H573/02 - 14 Jun 2022 [Exam Chat] »
- can anyone help me with utilitarianism »
- OCR A-Level Religious Studies Paper 2 (H573/02) 19th June 2023 [Exam Chat] »
- AQA A Level Philosophy Paper 1 + 2 (7172/1+2) 18th and 26th May 2023 [Exam Chat] »
- 2022 exam paper philosophy of religion,ethics and Buddhism. »
- Edexcel A-level Religious Studies Paper 1 (9RS0 01) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat] »
- RS A level OCR »
- AQA A Level Philosophy Paper 1 7172/1 - 19 May 2022 [Exam Chat] »
- Not sure if I should do Philosophyðics A-Level »
- Could anybody tell me if this paragraph is too long, not specific enough, etc etc? »
Comments
No comments have yet been made