Skip to main content
Humanities LibreTexts

1.1.14: Summary

  • Page ID
    89068
  • \( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \) \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)\(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)\(\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

    Utilitarianism remains a living theory and retains hedonistic and non-hedonistic advocates, as well as supporters of both act and rule formulations. The core insight that consequences matter gives the theory some intuitive support even in the light of hypothetical cases that pose serious problems for utilitarians. The extent to which the different versions of Utilitarianism survive their objections is very much up to you as a critically-minded philosopher to decide.

    COMMON STUDENT MISTAKES

    • Not reflecting the attitudinal aspect of pleasure that Bentham’s theory may account for.
    • Minimising the long-term impact of actions when it comes to pleasure/pain production.
    • Imprecise understanding of the hedonic/non-hedonic split in Utilitarianism.
    • Imprecision in use of examples to defend/challenge Utilitarianism.
    • Suggesting that “Jim and the Indians” is not a counterexample to Utilitarianism simply because you judge killing the fewer number of people is ultimately the morally right thing to do.

    ISSUES TO CONSIDER

    1. Is there anything that would improve your life that cannot be reduced to either pleasure or preference satisfaction?
    2. Would you enter Nozick’s experience machine if you knew you would not come out? Would you put someone you care about into the machine while they were asleep, so that they never had to make the decision?
    3. Can pleasure be measured? Does Bentham go about this task correctly?
    4. Which is the most serious problem facing Bentham’s Act Utilitarianism? Can it be overcome?
    5. Does Mill successfully improve Bentham’s Act Utilitarianism in any way?
    6. Are you ever told to stop watching television and do something else? Is this good for you? Why?
    7. Look at the quote at the start of the chapter by Dara Ó Briain — is it possible that some pleasures are inferior in value to others?
    8. Do you have convictions or beliefs you would not want to sacrifice for the greater good, should you ever be forced to?
    9. Why do utilitarians not give up on the idea of maximising pleasure and just talk in terms of promoting sufficient pleasure? Would this solve or raise problems?
    10. Is Weak Rule Utilitarianism merely Act Utilitarianism by another name?
    11. Does Strong Rule Utilitarianism deserve to be labelled as a utilitarian theory?
    12. If your preferences change after psychotherapy, did the original preferences ever matter?

    KEY TERMINOLOGY

    Normative

    Relativistic

    Teleological

    Consequentialist

    Principle of Utility

    Agent-Neutrality

    Hedonic Calculus

    Utility

    Intrinsic

    References

    Bentham, Jeremy, The Rationale of Reward (London: Robert Heward, 1830), freely available at https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=6igN9srLgg8C

    ―, ‘An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation’, in Utilitarianism and Other Essays, ed. by Alan Ryan (London: Penguin Books, 2004).

    ―, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, freely available at http://www.econlib.org/library/Bentham/bnthPML18.html

    Brandt, Richard, Ethical Theory: The Problems of Normative and Critical Ethics (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1959).

    Mill, John Stuart, On Liberty (London: Longman, Roberts, Green & Co., 1869), freely available at http://www.econlib.org/library/Mill/mlLbty1.html

    ―, ‘Utilitarianism’, in Utilitarianism and Other Essays, ed. by Alan Ryan (London: Penguin Books, 2004).

    ―, Utilitarianism, freely available at https://www.utilitarianism.com/mill1.htm

    Nozick, Robert, ‘The Experience Machine’, in Ethical Theory, ed. by Russ Shafer-Landau (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007).

    Thomson, Judith Jarvis, ‘The Trolley Problem’, The Yale Law Journal, 94.6 (1985): 1395–415, https://doi.org/10.2307/796133

    Toolis, Kevin, ‘The Most Dangerous Man in the World’, the Guardian (6 November 1999), freely available at https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/1999/nov/06/weekend.kevintoolis

    Williams, Bernard, ‘Jim and the Indians’, in his A Critique of Utilitarianism, freely available at https://www.unc.edu/courses/2009spring/plcy/240/001/Jim_and_Indians.pdf

     


    1.1.14: Summary is shared under a not declared license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by LibreTexts.

    • Was this article helpful?