Download Consequentialism in Morality and Justice | PHIL 1304 and more Study notes Ethics in PDF only on Docsity!
Consequentialism
Epicurus : Happiness (pleasure) is the highest good , the most valuable thing in
life. Minimize pain. “Epicurean”: a person devoted to sensual enjoyment, especially derived from fine food and drink. Moderation is encouraged (satisfying a desire brings pleasure, failing to satisfy a desire brings pain) Ex. Rivalry Game: “Martha has an intense desire to see the VT football team win the rivalry game against UVA. If she watches the game and VT wins, then she will feel extremely happy and the memory of the game will bring her happiness for a few weeks. But if she watches the game and VT loses, she will feel greatly disappointed and the memory of the game will bring her pain for a few weeks. However, if she does not watch the game, the outcome will not significantly affect her happiness.” Should Martha choose to watch the game? A. yes, b/c if VT wins then she will be extremely happy B. no, b/c then she won’t be disappointed Maxi-Min: Reducing unnecessary desires reduces pain, having (necessary) desires that are easy to satisfy produce pleasure. Thus, living moderately is conducive to happiness
Mill : Maximize Pleasure
Utilitarianism Greatest Happiness Principle: best consequences = most happiness total (maxi-total) Impartiality: everyone’s happiness counts equally The Pig Objection: “To suppose that life has…no higher end than pleasure – no better and nobler object of desire and pursuit – …[is] utterly mean and groveling, a doctrine worthy only of swine” Mill’s Response: There are higher and lower pleasures, and no amount of lower (sensual) pleasures are as good as a higher (intellectual) pleasures “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied, than a pig satisfied; better to be a Socrates dissatisfied, than a fool satisfied”
Act and Rule Utilitarianism:
Act Utilitarianism: morality depends on the consequences of a particular action
An action is right if (and only if) that particular action maximizes the total
happiness, an action is wrong if (and only if) that particular action takes away from the total happiness (i.e. execute one innocent girl to save miney)
Ground of Morality
o Ground of morality = what makes an action right
o Act Utilitarianism: maximizing total happiness
Decision Procedure o Decision procedure = how we should decide what to do o Act Utilitarianism: whatever procedure will maximize total happiness
Rule Utilitarianism: morality depends on the consequences of that kind of action An action is right if (and only if) that action conforms to a rule that, when followed, tends to maximize happiness, an action is wrong if (and only if) that action violates a rule that, when followed, tends to maximize happiness
Ex: Suppose publicly executing a person for a crime she is believed to have committed will prevent many people from committing that crime in the future. But those deciding whether to execute her or not know that she is innocent (and they know that no one else would ever find out she is innocent). According to _________, it would be morally wrong to execute the alleged criminal. A. Act Utilitarianism B. Rule Utilitarianism
Smart (on Rule Utilitarianism): when rules conflict, go with the action that will promote the greatest happiness in this case We are permitted to violate the rule when doing so leads to the best results (i.e. give the money to the hospital instead of the jockey club, regardless of the promise you made)
Kant
Kantian Ethics: moral rules = those required by reason (i) Can I rationally will that everyone act as I purpose to act? (ii) Does my action respect the goals of human beings rather than merely using them for my own purposes?
“Suppose Rock Star has an Adoring Fan who is willing to do whatever Rock Star asks. Rock Star decides that, if she is willing, Adoring Fan could be his footstool so that he can have a sit comfortably and tell his friends that he has a human footstool. Adoring Fan consents, so whenever Rock Star sits in his chair he props up his feet and rest them gently on the back of Adoring Fan, who is on her hands and knees. Does Rock Star treat Adoring Fan as a means or as an end? She is being used as a means She consents, but consents to being used as a means
Kant: consent is not sufficient
Rachels on Euthanasia and the Doctrine of Doing and Allowing (DDA) The Doctrine of Doing and Allowing (DDA): it is always morally worse to do harm than to allow that same harm to occur (i.e. it is worse to kill than to allow someone to be killed) Ex. Smith “Suppose Smith stands to inherit a large sum of money if his nephew dies. While the nephew is having a bath, Smith sneaks into the bathroom and pushes the boy’s head under the water. They boy struggles, and then dies. Ex. Jones “Suppose Jones stands to inherit a large sum of money if his nephew dies. While the nephew is having a bath, Jones sneaks into the bathroom. Jones is about to push the boy’s head under the water when the boy slips and falls into the water. Jones stands with his hand over the water, ready to push the boy’s head back under the water if he needs to. But there is no need. The boy dies all on his own.” Comparing Smith and Jones: They both had the intention to kill, the outcome is the same in both cases, killing vs. letting die
Rachels: if Smith and Jones did something equally wrong, than DDA is false Summary of Rachels: If an action promotes the best interest of everyone concerned and violates no one’s rights, then that action is morally acceptable.
Foot on the Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE)
The Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE): it can be morally permissible to cause a harm as a foreseen but unintended side effect, even if it’s never morally permissible to intent to bring about that harm Ex. Trolley “Suppose you are the driver of a runaway trolley. If the trolley continues on the track it is on then 5 innocent people will die. The only way to save the 5 people is for you to pull a lever and divert the trolley onto another track. But then 1 innocent person will die.” Ex. Fat Man “Suppose you are standing near a track when you notice a runaway trolley. If the trolley continues on the track it is on then 5 innocent people will die. The only way to save the 5 people is for you to push a fat man onto the track, but then he will certainly die.” DDE says: Trolley: pull the lever (5 live, 1 dies) // Fat man: do nothing (5 die, 1 lives)
Two Kinds of Duties (Foot):
- Duty to help others
- Duty not to harm others (the duty not to harm always outweighs the duty to help) So…pull the lever, do not push the fat man
