Consequentialism

1
Consequentialism

• Jeremy Bentham

• John Stuart Mill

THIS IS BENTHAMS REAL HEAD
2
Benthams Utilitarianism

• The Greatest Happiness Principle
• Humans only act for the sake of pleasure and to
  avoid pain. The good is pleasure.
• The Hedonic Calculus calculate utility of each
  possible action

3
HEDONISM

• Both Bentham and Mill are Hedonistic
  Utilitarians
• Hedonism has two versions that we must attend to
• Psychological Hedonism The claim that human
  action is motivated by pleasure/pain.
• Ethical Hedonism The claim that pleasure is
  good and pain is bad/evil.

4
Benthams Hedonic Calculus

• Intensity (The relative strength of the
  sensation)
• Duration (how long it lasts)
• Certainty or uncertainty (How likely the
  sensation is to follow the act)
• Propinquity or remoteness (how immediate is the
  sensation)
• Fecundity (likelihood of producing further
  utility effects)
• Purity (is the sensation of a single kind or is
  it mixed?)
• Extent (for all who are affected) KEY POINT,
  NOT JUST YOU

5
Benthams Moral Theory

• Benthams Theory of Value The good is pleasure.
  Each action has an objective value determined by
  the hedonic calculus
• Benthams Theory of Right Conduct every agent
  is morally obligated to perform the action which
  will maximize pleasure overall for everyone
  involved.

6
Mills Utilitarianism

• Mill defends and extends Benthams view against
  criticisms.
• There are subtle changes which make Mills view
  superior
• These changes result from the attempt to answer
  specific objections.

7
Mills Moral Theory-Right Conduct

• The creed which accepts as the foundation of
  morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness
  Principle, holds that actions are right in
  proportion as they tend to promote happiness,
  wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of
  happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and
  the absence of pain by unhappiness, pain, and
  the privation of pleasure. To give a clear view
  of the moral standard set up by the theory, much
  more requires to be said in particular, what
  things it includes in the ideas of pain and
  pleasure and to what extent this is left an open
  question. (Mill Util, II, para 2)

8
Mills Theory of Right Conduct

• TRC-U actions are right in proportion as they
  tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to
  produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is
  intended pleasure, and the absence of pain by
  unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure.
  

9
Mills Moral Theory- Value

• But these supplementary explanations do not
  affect the theory of life on which this theory of
  morality is grounded- namely, that pleasure, and
  freedom from pain, are the only things desirable
  as ends and that all desirable things (which are
  as numerous in the utilitarian as in any other
  scheme) are desirable either for the pleasure
  inherent in themselves, or as means to the
  promotion of pleasure and the prevention of
  pain. (Mill, Util, II, Para 2).

10
Mills Theory of Value

• TV-U Pleasure and freedom from pain are the
  only things desirable as ends.

11
The Objections

• Mill formulated his version of Utilitarianism in
  response to specific objections which had
  undercut Benthams version
• These objections either attacked utilitarianism
  for denying that humans were special or by
  denying that it was practical.

12
The Doctrine of Swine Objection

1. Util. assumes that pleasure is the good (Moral
   Hedonism)
2. Util. assumes that we only act for the sake of
   pleasure (Psychological Hedonism)
3. This is how animals behave, not humans
4. Thus, Util. requires that humans be like animals
   (like swine).
5. Hence we should reject Util. because humans are
   not swine.

13
Types of Pleasure Reply

1. So What. If Psychological Hedonism is true then
   it is true.
2. Two Types of Pleasure Higher and Lower
3. Higher Pleasures are superior (the comparison
   proof)

14
Too High for Humanity Objection

1. Util. requires that we act for the sake of the
   greatest good.
2. This might require a human to act to their own
   disadvantage or death.
3. This is an unrealistic expectation, most humans
   are constitutionally incapable of altruism (ought
   implies can)
4. Therefore, Util. requires more from humans than
   they are capable of.
5. Therefore, Util. cannot be the correct account of
   human morality.

15
Individual Goods comprise the General Good Reply

1. The good of all is the same as the sum of all
   individual goods
2. Individuals can always pursue their own goods
3. If every individual pursues their own pleasure
   that is the same as pursuing the good of all.
4. Economic Analogue?

16
Lack of Time Objection

1. Util. requires that we calculate the value of
   every possible act and chose the best.
2. Such a calculation is beyond the ability of human
   beings
3. Such calculations would take a great deal of time
4. We must therefore either act without calculating
   or calculate in place of action we lack time to
   do both.
5. Therefore, we cannot fulfill our obligations
   under Util.

17
Rule of Thumb Reply

1. Not every action requires a new calculation
2. The history of humanity provides adequate
   evidence of general rules of utility
3. Traditional morality reflects these general rules
4. Obeying traditional morality yields the same
   basic result that would result from calculation

18
Mills Hedonic Calculus

1. Intensity (The relative strength of the
   sensation)
2. Duration (how long it lasts)
3. Certainty or uncertainty (How likely the
   sensation is to follow the act)
4. Propinquity or remoteness (how immediate is the
   sensation)
5. Fecundity (likelihood of producing further
   utility effects)
6. Purity (is the sensation of a single kind or is
   it mixed?)
7. Extent (for all who are affected) KEY POINT,
   NOT JUST YOU
8. Type (higher or lower?)

19
Mills Moral Theory

• The basic gist of Mills moral theory is this
• Human beings pursuing their own happiness
  (primarily intellectual happiness) will over time
  produce a world that contains the greatest net
  amount of happiness. Therefore, each person has
  a moral obligation to maximize their own pleasure
  (or at least to structure their life so as to
  permit the pursuit of pleasure).

20
General Objections to Mills Utilitarianism

• Immoral to Promulgate
• Illegitimate Aggregation of Goods
• Cannot Quantify Utility
• Allows the ends to justify the means
• -Lives for Headaches
• -Innocent Spelunker
• -Dying Promise Case

21
A Complication

• Act-Utilitarianism The rightness or wrongness
  of an action is determined through case-by-case
  calculation
• Rule-Utilitarianism The rightness or wrongness
  of an action is determined by rules that
  generally tend to promote overall utility

22
A Question (or two, to keep in mind)

• If Act utilitarianism is too complicated
  consequentialists must be rule utilitarians.
• BUT How do we determine the moral rules?
• And is there any difference between
  rule-utilitarianism and Kantian ethics?

23
Is Utilitarianism Correct?

• The factors in favor of consequentialism
  generally seem less than conclusive.
• What are the other options?
• -Morality based on Rules/Principles
• -Morality based upon Character

24
Principle based Moral Theories

• Objective moral theories require that something
  govern morality which does not depend upon
  individual persons or cultures.
• Consequentialism assumes this must involve an
  objective source of value
• Principle based moral theories assume that moral
  principles play this role.
• The most important principle based theory is due
  to Kant.

25
Kantian Ethics

• Immanual Kant
• German Philosopher
• Konigsberg, Prussia
• (Kalliningrad, Russia)
• Single-handedly formalized moral philosophy

26
Morality and Reason

• Kants main insight is this
• If all men are rational and morality is rooted
  in reason, then morality will have the same
  content for all and make the same demand on
  everyone.
• Perfectly objective moral theory

27
Kants Theory of Value

• Kants moral philosophy is all about conduct.
  But he begins his most influential moral work
  with these words
• The only thing that is good in itself is a
  good will.
• The only thing we should value is the fact that a
  person is motivated to do what duty requires of
  them.

28
Moral Motivation

• Kant does make a controversial claim about
  motivation.
• Mill and Hume say that all motivation is rooted
  in desire (BDI model)
• Kant says that some motivation is rooted in
  desire but some is based upon reason alone.

29
Kants Theory of Right Conduct Part I

• In broad outline Kant claims that an act is
  forbidden if it is incompatible with reason and
  required if not doing it is incompatible with
  reason.
• There is no MORAL value in the consequences of an
  action only in the MOTIVATION behind the action.
• Consequences can yield only non-moral value.

30
Commands of Reason

• Kants main problem is how to determine the
  commands of reason, in particular those commands
  which comprise the so-called moral law
• There are two kinds of commands of reason moral
  commands and non-moral commands.

31
Maxims

• In order to see how these commands are commands
  of reason we need to introduce the notion of a
  MAXIM
• A Maxim a subjective practical principle, a
  rule of rational action that you give yourself,
  it involves a description of your action.

32
Hypothetical Imperatives

• If your maxim gives a command of reason that
  applies to a particular person, in a particular
  situation, or relative to a desire, then the
  command is not a command of morality.
• Kant calls these HYPOTHETICAL IMPERATIVES (HI)
• - An imperative is a command of reason
• - It is hypothetical because it only applies
  under certain conditions

33
Practical Reasoning

• Hypothetical Imperatives are commands of reason
  related to the achievement of goals that we
  desire or solving problems
• How do I get to Memphis?
• How do I fix my Toilet?
• Why are they commands of reason because they
  relate means and endsour selection of a means is
  determined by the end (goal).

34
Categorical Imperatives

• If a command of reason applies to all rational
  agents in all circumstances, situations, and
  without regard to desire then the command is a
  moral command or reason
• Kant calls commands of the moral law CATEGORICAL
  IMPERATIVES (CI)
• - It is categorical because it commands all
  members of a group Rational Agents

35
Categorical Imperatives II

• Kant offers several ways to test potential
  actions (maxims) to see if they agree with the
  Moral Law (i.e. if they express CIs) We will
  look at two
• The Universal Law Test
• The Humanity Test

36
CI as Universal Law (UL)

• CI-UL Act only according to that maxim whereby
  you can at the same time will that it should be
  come a universal law
• Applications
• -The Shopkeeper
• Lying Promise
• Suicide

37
Application of UL (1)

• Shopkeeper Maxim from self love I will act so as
  to treat people such that I can maximize my gain
  at their expense
• Inconsistency Will self love and gain while I
  also will that I be used by others

38
Application of UL (2)

• Suicide Maxim from self-love I make as my
  principle to shorten my life when its continued
  duration threatens more evil than it promises
  satisfaction
• Inconsistency will self-love (preservation)
  and from self-love that you die
  (non-preservation)

39
Application of UL (3)

• Lying Promise Maxim when I believe myself to
  be in need of money, I will borrow money and
  promise to pay it back, although I know I can
  never do so.
• Inconsistency I will that I commit myself and
  that I not be committed.

40
CI as Equal Regard (ER)

• CI-H Act in such a way that you treat humanity,
  whether in your own person or in the person of
  another, always at the same time as an end and
  never simply as a means
• - An end is a being capable of setting its own
  goals and making choices.
• - If I treat you as a mere means, I make choices
  for you and substitute my goals for goals you
  might choose.

41
Application of ER (1)

• Shopkeeper Maxim from self love I will act so as
  to treat people such that I can maximize my gain
  at their expense
• Problem If how I treat you varies based upon
  my desire, then I chose for you how you will be
  treated.

42
Application of ER (2)

• Suicide Maxim from self-love I make as my
  principle to shorten my life when its continued
  duration threatens more evil than it promises
  satisfaction
• Problem If I kill myself, I deny my future
  self choice. I subordinate my existence to my
  suffering. I would not choose to die in other
  situations.

43
Application of ER (3)

• Lying Promise Maxim when I believe myself to
  be in need of money, I will borrow money and
  promise to pay it back, although I know I can
  never do so.
• Problem If keeping a promise depends upon my
  needs then I reserve the right to determine for
  you whether you benefit or not from my promise.

44
Kant on Right Conduct II

• Moral vs Legal Actions
• The importance of motive reveals the distinction
• Act from duty Moral Act
• Act from desire, but in accord with duty Legal
  Act
• Only Moral acts have value!
• Very hard to tell if an act is moralmotive MUST
  be PURE

45
Kant on Right Conduct III

• Legal acts are still morally RIGHT, but they do
  not contribute to the moral worth of the world
  (the good will).
• There are many duties
• Perfect dutiesspecific commands
• Imperfect Duties non-specific commands

46
Morality and Reason (2)

• Why think that the commands of reason are moral
  commands?
• Perfect Moral Agent (God)
• Imperfect Moral Agents (Humans)
• God WILL do what reason demands
• Humans OUGHT to do what reason demands.

47
Autonomy and Morality

• The essence of Kants moral theory can be reduced
  to the notion of AUTONOMY.
• - Gk Auto-Self, Nomos-Law
• The be autonomous is to give the (moral) law of
  reason to yourself.
• If you let something outside of yourself (e.g. an
  object of desire) command your will then the law
  comes from that object.
• External law is called Heteronomy
• The Law from within is pure, based in reason
  alone, thus autonomous.

48
John Rawls (20th c. Kant?)

• (Dead) American Philosopher John Rawls
  reformulated the Kantian insight in his A Theory
  of Justice which was the theoretical basis for
  much of late 20th. C. social policy in the US.
• Rawls two principles
• Maximum equal liberty (maximize liberty
  consistent with equal liberty for all)
• Difference (differences in liberty, power,
  authority, etc. must benefit ALL members of a
  society)

49
Comments on Kant

• Theory of Motivation is wrong
• No way to be moral (pure action is impossible)
• Exceptionless?
• Absolutism does not resolve conflicts
• Multiple descriptions/Many Maxims for one act

50
Virtue Ethics

• The third main objectivist moral theory focuses
  on the moral agent.
• The aim of a virtue theory is to explain how and
  why we should live and structure our lives.
• Virtue ethics was first made clear by Aristotle
• Virtue ethics is teleological but not
  consequentialist

51
Aristotle

• Aristotle
• Greek philosopher
• Student of Plato
• Trained as Natural Scientist and Physician

52
The Highest Good for Humanity(1)

• Virtue ethics is teleological (goal directed),
  but the goal is not to achieve certain
  consequences.
• The goal is to perfect the character of the
  person. Character is a state of the soul.
• A persons character helps determine their
  desires and reactions, so character will help to
  govern action.
• A person of good character will not be disposed
  to do what we might call evil.

53
The Highest Good for Humanity(2)

• The goal for Aristotle is the Highest Good
• What goal does all human activity aim at?
• Wealth? (no)
• Honor? (no)
• Pleasure? (no)
• Wisdom?

ALL HUMAN ACTIVITY AIMS AT HAPPINESS
54
What is Happiness?

• The Greek term is
• Eudaimonia Eu GoodDaimonia state of
  being or state of spirit.
• This is not the same as feeling happy.
• Happiness is more complex than a mere feeling

55
The Good Life for Humanity

• For Aristotle Ethics was part of Politics.
• The aim of politics was to determine the best
  form of government A government that would
  allow people to live the good life
• The study of ethics was to determine the good
  life for humanity.

56
Happiness is the good life

• To experience Eudaimonia is to live the good
  life.
• Aristotles task is to determine what the good
  life for human beings looks like
• To discover the nature of the good life Aristotle
  looks at the essence of a human being, the human
  soul

57
The Platonic Soul

• Aristotles view is a reaction to Platos
  thought.
• The Platonic Soul had 3 parts
• Appetitive desires
• Spirited sensory and motivating, the will
• Rational thinking
• Human psychology was seen as a battle between the
  Appetites and Reason for control of the will
• The Just Soul for Plato is ruled by reason
  assisted by the spirited soul.

58
The Aristotelian Soul

• Aristotles picture of the soul also has 3 parts
• The Nutritive Soul -- life
• The Appetitive Soul desires and action
• The Rational Soul reason
• BUT only the Rational soul was essentially human.
• This insight is cashed out through Aristotles
  so-called Function Argument.

59
The Function Argument (1)

• What is the function (Ergon) of Man?
• The proper human function is some activity of the
  human soul, which only humans can do.  Therefore
  it is the function of the reasoning or rational
  part of the soul.
• (Aristotle argues for this claim by
  elimination)1) Plant souls are nutritive, so
  anything we do in common with plants is not
  uniquely human.  2)Animal souls are both
  appetitive and nutrative, so anything we do in
  common with animals is not uniquely human. 
  3)What is left is the rational soul.

60
The Function Argument (2)

• 1.  The proper human function is the function of
  the reasoning or rational part of the soul.
• 2.  The Human Soul expresses its rationality in
  two ways (a) by having reason (understanding or
  thinking, intellectual activity), and (b) by
  obeying reason (practical problem solving,
  knowing how to do things).
• 3.  Human life is either a capacity or an
  activity.  Life is best seen as an activity,
  since we wouldn't call something with the
  capacity to live, but which doesn't actually live
  alive.
• 4. Combining (1), (2), and (3)  Aristotle
  concludes that
•   The proper function of a human being is, the
  activity of the human soul which expresses its
  reason either by having it, or by obeying it.
•     (Translation  The uniquely human thing about
  us is that in our activities we try to understand
  about the world and how to best do things).

61
The Function Argument (3)

• 1.  For any thing of type F,  e.g. a flute, an F
  (flute) and an excellent F (excellent Flute) will
  have the same proper function.
• 2.  A human beings proper function is "the
  activity of the human soul which expresses its
  reason either by having it, or by obeying it.
• 3.  The Good Life (excellent life/virtuous life)
  will be a life where our function is done well.
• 4.  Doing a thing well is the same thing as doing
  it with its proper virtue.
• 5.  The GOOD LIFE (Human Good), therefore, is
  "the activity of the human soul which expresses
  its reason either by having it, or by obeying it"
  which expresses the proper virtue(s)
• 6.  If more than one virtue is involved, the Good
  will be the most complete virtue.

62
Comments on The Function Argument

• The difference between life and good life is the
  presence of something good (or excellent).
• A complete virtue is a virtue that cannot be
  enhanced by adding more X