1. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist moral theory that defines morality in terms of maximizing utility, or happiness, for all affected parties. It was most influentially developed by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill.
2. The basic principle of utilitarianism is that actions are right to the degree that they promote the greatest good for the greatest number. However, there are objections to determining the consequences of actions and making the necessary calculations to apply the theory.
3. In response to objections, some propose rule utilitarianism, where behavior is evaluated based on rules that would lead to the greatest good if universally followed, rather than directly applying the utility principle to each act. However,
These slides are for an Introduction to Philosophy course at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, BC, Canada. They cover chapters 1, 2 and 5 of Mill's text called Utilitarianism. There is also a slide towards the end distinguishing act and rule utilitarianism.
These slides are for an Introduction to Philosophy course at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, BC, Canada. They cover chapters 1, 2 and 5 of Mill's text called Utilitarianism. There is also a slide towards the end distinguishing act and rule utilitarianism.
Jeremy Bentham was an English philosopher and political radical. He is primarily known today for his moral philosophy, especially his principle of utilitarianism, which evaluates actions based upon their consequences. ... Happiness, according to Bentham, is thus a matter of experiencing pleasure and lack of pain.
Utilitarianism is one of the best known and most influential moral theories. ... Utilitarians believe that the purpose of morality is to make life better by increasing the number of good things (such as pleasure and happiness) in the world and decreasing the number of bad things (such as pain and unhappiness).
These slides are for a course called Introduction to Philosophy at the University of British Columbia-Vancouver, Canada. They talk about Chapters 1, 2, 4 and 5 of John Stuart Mill's book called Utilitarianism. There is also a bit at the end about act and rule utilitarianism
GuidanceUtilitarianism Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart MillUti.docxwhittemorelucilla
Guidance
Utilitarianism: Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill
Utilitarianism associates the notion of “good” in relation to “happiness” or “pleasure,” if we can understand these words in the widest possible sense. See below for Bentham's appeal to "pain and pleasure" as the "masters" of humankind. This view of what is “good” is referred to as “hedonism.” Hedonism is a word which some may be familiar with in a negative, pejorative sense. This is not surprising, since the idea of “hedonism” have long been used disparagingly as a charge against people who seem to seek their own pleasure, without concern for the welfare or interests of others. Concern for happiness or pleasure does not need to be taken in such a narrow way. Many religious traditions from Buddhism, Christianity (particularly the “Puritans” who immigrated to the Americas from England) and Islam, amongst others, have emphasized denial of bodily pleasure and enjoyment, preferring sacrifice of self and denial of the body as ideals, making the idea of “hedonism” as source for ethical judgment seem contradictory to many people. These religious traditions tend to portray the pursuit of pleasure as “sinful,” distracting from what they take to be more important pursuits like worshiping of a God, or preparation for death. But even many versions of these religious traditions also seek or promise some form of “happiness” or “pleasure” to those who follow their ways (though, such happiness is often supposedly found in another realm after death.)
The joys or pleasures we seek are not always the immediate product of our actions. We may in fact choose to do less than pleasant things for the sake of achieving some sought goal, which will then bring about happiness. We might consider the example of going to the dentist and getting our teeth drilled as one such activity. *(Note, I would like to contend from my own experience that if one uses local anesthesia and has a competent dentist, there shouldn't really be pain involved.)
The following excerpt from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy adds some important, general considerations regarding the philosophy of utilitarianism:
"utilitarianism is generally held to be the view that the morally right action is the action that produces the most good. There are many ways to spell out this general claim. One thing to note is that the theory is a form of consequentialism: the right action is understood entirely in terms of consequences produced. What distinguishes utilitarianism from egoism has to do with the scope of the relevant consequences. On the utilitarian view one ought to maximize the overall good — that is, consider the good of others as well as one's own good.
The classical utilitarians, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, identified the good with pleasure, so, like Epicurus, were hedonists about value. They also held that we ought to maximize the good, that is, bring about ‘the greatest amount of good for the greatest number’.
Utili ...
Jeremy Bentham was an English philosopher and political radical. He is primarily known today for his moral philosophy, especially his principle of utilitarianism, which evaluates actions based upon their consequences. ... Happiness, according to Bentham, is thus a matter of experiencing pleasure and lack of pain.
Utilitarianism is one of the best known and most influential moral theories. ... Utilitarians believe that the purpose of morality is to make life better by increasing the number of good things (such as pleasure and happiness) in the world and decreasing the number of bad things (such as pain and unhappiness).
These slides are for a course called Introduction to Philosophy at the University of British Columbia-Vancouver, Canada. They talk about Chapters 1, 2, 4 and 5 of John Stuart Mill's book called Utilitarianism. There is also a bit at the end about act and rule utilitarianism
GuidanceUtilitarianism Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart MillUti.docxwhittemorelucilla
Guidance
Utilitarianism: Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill
Utilitarianism associates the notion of “good” in relation to “happiness” or “pleasure,” if we can understand these words in the widest possible sense. See below for Bentham's appeal to "pain and pleasure" as the "masters" of humankind. This view of what is “good” is referred to as “hedonism.” Hedonism is a word which some may be familiar with in a negative, pejorative sense. This is not surprising, since the idea of “hedonism” have long been used disparagingly as a charge against people who seem to seek their own pleasure, without concern for the welfare or interests of others. Concern for happiness or pleasure does not need to be taken in such a narrow way. Many religious traditions from Buddhism, Christianity (particularly the “Puritans” who immigrated to the Americas from England) and Islam, amongst others, have emphasized denial of bodily pleasure and enjoyment, preferring sacrifice of self and denial of the body as ideals, making the idea of “hedonism” as source for ethical judgment seem contradictory to many people. These religious traditions tend to portray the pursuit of pleasure as “sinful,” distracting from what they take to be more important pursuits like worshiping of a God, or preparation for death. But even many versions of these religious traditions also seek or promise some form of “happiness” or “pleasure” to those who follow their ways (though, such happiness is often supposedly found in another realm after death.)
The joys or pleasures we seek are not always the immediate product of our actions. We may in fact choose to do less than pleasant things for the sake of achieving some sought goal, which will then bring about happiness. We might consider the example of going to the dentist and getting our teeth drilled as one such activity. *(Note, I would like to contend from my own experience that if one uses local anesthesia and has a competent dentist, there shouldn't really be pain involved.)
The following excerpt from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy adds some important, general considerations regarding the philosophy of utilitarianism:
"utilitarianism is generally held to be the view that the morally right action is the action that produces the most good. There are many ways to spell out this general claim. One thing to note is that the theory is a form of consequentialism: the right action is understood entirely in terms of consequences produced. What distinguishes utilitarianism from egoism has to do with the scope of the relevant consequences. On the utilitarian view one ought to maximize the overall good — that is, consider the good of others as well as one's own good.
The classical utilitarians, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, identified the good with pleasure, so, like Epicurus, were hedonists about value. They also held that we ought to maximize the good, that is, bring about ‘the greatest amount of good for the greatest number’.
Utili ...
PHI 210RS – Module 3 Case Analysis Rubric Identify the .docxkarlhennesey
PHI 210RS – Module 3 Case Analysis Rubric
Identify the moral issue(s) and the parties involved; discuss the case with respect to the principle of utility, taking care to identify the benefits and burdens that pertain to the parties
affected.
Student Name: ___________________________________________ Date: _______________________
Rating Scale Exemplary: Corresponds to an A- to A (90-100%) Novice: Corresponds to D to D+ (60-69%)
Proficient: Corresponds to B- to B+ (80-89%) Not Attempted: Corresponds to an F (0-59%)
Basic: Corresponds to C- to C+ (70-79%)
Students will complete the assignment with attention to the following criteria:
Elements
Criteria
Score
Not Attempted
(Criterion is missing
or not in evidence)
Novice
(does not meet
expectations;
performance is
substandard)
Basic
(works towards meeting
expectations; performance
needs improvement)
Proficient
(meets expectations;
performance is
satisfactory)
Exemplary
(exceeds expectations;
performance is outstanding)
Analyzing case in
terms of the
principle of utility
(identification of
parties involved,
benefits and
burdens, and
alternative
possible actions or
policies)
90%
0-53.99%
Paraphrases the
information in the
case without
attempting an
analysis or states
opinions without
attempting an
analysis. Discusses
irrelevant facts
54-62.99%
Attempts to provide an
analysis of the case, but
does not connect
analysis to facts of the
case. Is vague on three
counts: identifying the
parties involved, the
benefits and burdens at
stake, and the alternative
possible actions or
policies at stake
63-71.99%
Attempts to provide
an analysis of the case;
connects analysis to facts
of the case; is vague on
two of the following:
identifying the parties
involved or the benefits and
burdens at stake, or the
alternative possible actions
or policies at stake
72-80.99%
Attempts to provide an
analysis of the case;
connects analysis to facts
of the case; is vague on
one of the following:
identifying the parties
involved or the benefits
and burdens at stake, or
the alternative possible
actions or policies at stake
81-90%
Provides a well-rounded analysis of
the case; connects analysis to facts
of the case; is successful in all
three of the following: identifying
the parties involved, the benefits
and burdens at stake, and the
alternative possible actions or
policies at stake
___/90
Mechanics of
Writing
10%
0-5.99%
Little to no
evidence of proper
writing mechanics
6-6.99%
The grammar of the case
analysis greatly impedes
understanding of content
7-7.99%
The case analysis needs a
good deal of improvement
with respect to grammar,
spelling, and/or style
8-8.99%
The case analysis is
mostly free of errors with
respect to grammar,
spelling, and/or style, but
needs some improvement
9-10%
The case analysis is near ...
This is the course on Medical/clinical ethics presented to the MBE (Master of Bioethics) students at Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University. It includes the main topics only. Please note that the sources of almost all slides are listed as links at the bottom of the slide itself.
1. Utilitarianism Consequentialist moral theories are teleological: they aim at some goal state and evaluate the morality of actions in terms of progress toward that state. The best known version of consequentialism is utilitarianism. This theory defines morality in terms of the maximization of net expectable utility for all parties affected by a decision or action. Although forms of utilitarianism have been put forward and debated since ancient times, the modern theory is most often associated with the British philosopher John Stuart Mill (1806- 1873) who developed the theory from a plain hedonistic version put forward by his mentor Jeremy Bentham (1748- 1832). As most clearly stated by Mill, the basic principle of utilitarianism is: Actions are right to the degree that they tend to promote the greatest good for the greatest number.
2. 1. It is not always clear what the outcome of an action will be, nor is it always possible to determine who will be affected by it. Judging an action by the outcome is therefore hard to do beforehand. 2. It is very difficult to quantify pleasures for cost/benefit analysis (but since this only has to be done on a comparative scale, this may not be as serious an objection as it at first seems). 3. The calculation required to determine the right is both complicated and time consuming. Many occasions will not permit the time and many individuals may not even be capable of the calculations. 4. Since the greatest good for the greatest number is described in aggregate terms, that good may be achieved under conditions that are harmful to some, so long as that harm is balanced by a greater good. 5. The theory fails to acknowledge any individual rights that could not be violated for the sake of the greatest good. Indeed, even the murder of an innocent person would seem to be condoned if it served the greater number.
3. A system of rules would help with the other objections, however, even if they only serve as convenient advice. They would codify the wisdom of past experience, and preclude the need for constant calculation. Indeed, some writers propose that the theory of utilitarianism, although it correctly describes the ultimate sanction of moral principles, is best preserved for the minority that are capable of applying it. The greatest good is best served by the masses when they follow rules out of duty and leave the difficult and subtle calculations to those in authority. This attitude, along with the attempted qualitative distinctions among pleasures, and utilitarianism's tendency to condone inequitable distributions or even the abuse of minorities has led to frequent charges of elitism. It should be noted that this was far from Mill's purpose. John Stuart Mill was a leader in the fight against the African slave trade, and a pioneer for women's rights and individual liberties. It is a curious fact that his own theory of ethics fails to serve those ideals any better than it does.
4. In response to objections such as these, some proponents of utilitarianism have proposed a modification of the theory. Let us call the original form: Act Utilitarianism-- each individual action is to be evaluated directly in terms of the utility principle. The proposed improvement is: Rule Utilitarianism-- behavior is evaluated by rules that, if universally followed would lead to the greatest good for the greatest number. Thus, rule utilitarianism could address the fourth and fifth objections mentioned above by using the utility principle to justify rules establishing human rights and the universal prohibition of certain harms. But it may not be so simple. If the justification of the rule is found in the utility principle, what about the case where violating the rule leads to the achievement of the greatest good for the greatest number? If the theory is to be truly utilitarian, it must maintain the utility principle as its ultimate standard, and no intermediate rules or rights could stand against it.
5. Of course, we are still unclear about what constitutes "the greatest good." For Bentham, it was simply "the tendency to augment or diminish happiness or pleasure," with no distinctions to be made between pleasures or persons--all measures are strictly quantitative. For Mill, however, not all pleasures were equally worthy. He defined "the good" in terms of well-being (Aristotle's eudaimonia), and distinguished not just quantitatively but also qualitatively between various forms of pleasure. In either case, the principle defines the moral right in terms of an objective, material good. The point is to make the theory "scientific," and the utility principle is an attempt to bridge the gap between empirical facts and a normative conclusion--a simple cost/benefit analysis is proposed.
6. Both men insisted that "the greatest number" included all who were affected by the action in question with "each to count as one, and no one as more than one." Any theory that seeks to extend benefits not only to the self but also to others is a form of altruism . (Another goal-directed theory is egoism, which promotes the greatest good for the self alone.) Utilitarianism is a simple theory and its results are easy to apply. It also allows for degrees of right and wrong, and for every situation the choice between actions is clear-cut: always choose that which has the greatest utility. There are several objections, however--