Lesson 10:

Utilitarianism, Justice
and Fairness
UTILITARIANISM

• Utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory

that places the locus of right and wrong
solely on the outcomes (consequences) of
choosing one action/policy over other
actions/policies. As such, it moves beyond
the scope of one's own interests and takes
into account the interests of others.
It is “consequentialist”

- asks questions “What good will come from

doing this?” “What benefit can one get in
performing such an act?” “What harm would
come if a particular action is done?” “Who will
stand to gain if this action is performed?”
•No action in itself can be considered or
called good or bad, right or wrong, apart
from its outcome
•The moral worth of an act is dependent
to its consequences
•An act is always an instrument to
achieve something
Ethical Hedonism

•Emphasizes on the pleasure and

happiness/contentment that one
can get from doing an act or from a
particular course of action
•It abhors pain or unhappiness
• Right or wrong is dependent on the pleasure or pain
that an act will bring or result
• This also brings to the mind of famous Freudian
idea of the “id”
• Pain or unhappiness is something that we all
avoid
• Pain and suffering is something that is simply
repugnant to human nature.
Ethical Hedonism

•Advocates a philosophy that holds that

the primary reason for living is to seek
for pleasure or happiness and to avoid
pain and suffering as much as possible.
The Principle of Utility

• 18th Century – European Philosophers – expounded

and articulated utilitarianism
• True founders: Jeremy Bethnam and his pupil John
Stuart Mill
• Bentham specifically coined the famous phrase
“principle of utility” (Utilitarianism)
• The claim that there is one and only one
moral principle – that of utility makes
utilitarianism an ethical theory than can be
sonsidered, in a way, absolutist and a believer
in objective morality.
• Usually “utility” means that it serves some
purpose or function
• Bentham and Mill
• Utilitarianism aims at consequences , which are good,
that everybody wants and this is happinnes or pleasure.
• Utilitarianism has also come to be known as “happiness
theory”
• Utilitarianism then becomes an ethical priciple that
measures the amount of happiness over unhappiness of a
certain act
• “Hedonic Calculus” – a table of measurement invented by
bentham to arrive at an exact calculation of the amount of
pleasure that act may bring
The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number

• What makes utilitarianism appealing?

• Emphasis on the social dimension of morality
• Utilitarianism offers more practicable alternative than the
other ethical theories
e.g. our political system is so dominated by self-interest of
few individuals that the pursuit of the general welfare has
been neglected.
• Scottish Philosopher Hutcheson – first formulated the phrase
“The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number”
• Utilitarianism goes back to the earliest beginning of
the history of ethical thought
• Mill insists that it has been presupposed by
practically all ethical philosophers (Epicurus &
Aristippus)
• Popular for their supreme emphasis on the
pursuit of pleasure or happiness as the central
meaning and reason of human existence (Ethical
Hedonism)
BENTHAM’S HEDONIC CALCULUS
(COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS)
• Its aim is to arrive at a definite basis of when to say
that an act or conduct is right or wrong, good or
bad
• It’s main goal is to “help individuals as well as
lawmakers and legislators decide what ought to be
done in any given set of circumstances” (Falikowski
2004)
• What truly matters in the end is the maximization of
pleasure or happiness and minimization if not the
total eradication of pain or suffering
Hedonic calculus

• Hedons – greek word means pleasure

• Calculus – a science of calculation
• it is used for determining morality y
measuring the exact amount of pleasure and
pain, happiness and unhappiness
 HEDONIC CALCULUS (BENTHAM 1976-67)

INTENSITY the more intense the pleasure, the better

DURATION The longer the pleasure lasts, the better

CERTAINTY the more certain the pleasure, the better

PROPINQUITY The nearer, the closer or more often that
pleasures occur, the better

FECUNDITY The greater the possibility that the pleasure that

one can derive from an act will be followed by
more pleasures, the better

PURITY The purer the pleasure, the better

EXTENT The greater the number of people who can

experience pleasure, the better
HEDONIC CALCULUS

• giving a fixed numerical value to each of the seven

elements, say from 1-10; 1 signifies the lowest while
ten the highest.
• The amount of pleasure is deducted from the
amount of pain to arrive at the balance
• If total amount is more on pleasure = pursue the act
for it is morally good or right
• If total amount is more on pain = do pursue the act
for it is morally bad or wrong
HEDONIC CALCULUS

• Is somewhat similar to cost-benefit analysis

• Cost are pains; benefits are pleasures
• E.g. going abroad
• Benefit – economic benefit
• Cost – leaving one’s family
• E.g. Commit oneself to marriage
• Benefit – marital bliss
• Cost – loss of freedom
Two kinds of pleasure

• Bentham’s formulation of hedonic calculus put him

(rightly or wrongly) under the level of a psychologist
hedonist
• He emphasized that we must not only pursue our
own self-interest (like the ethical egoist) but also
that of the group or majority
• Mill developed his own version that enables his
view to deviate from that of his mastes
Two types of pleasure

• According to Mill, pleasures have two tyoes:

quantity and quality
• Pleasure differ not just in amount but also in quality
• Pleasure of the mind and spirit is higher than the
pleasure of the flesh and of the body
• According to Mill, seek the higher pleasure than the
pleasure of lower kind (sensual satisfaction
• “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a
pig satisfied: better to be Socrates dissatisfied than
a fool satisfied” – Mill
• Bentham – only pleasure or is happiness is the only
good in itself
• Mill – values not just the amount of pleasure that
one can get but the particular type of pleasure that
follows from it
• E.g. you receive an allowance of one thousand
pesos from your parents for the week. What will
you buy?
A. food, drinks and other physical vices(cigarettes
and liquors)
B. Ethics book, Theology book, Pharmacognosy
book, Microbiology book, Remmington, etc
• One should spend part of it to feed one’s mind and
soul and not just to satisfy one’s bodily needs and
physical carvings – Mill’s Prescription Rx
“A life with only bodily pleasures is not as good as good as
one containing pleasures of the mind and spirit. The pleasure
that one gets from acquiring love, having knowledge, being
morally good, securing freedom, knowing God, and so on
makes life much more worth living than a life that wallows in
the mire of bodily pleasures alone”
Critical assessment
Strong points of utilitarianism

• Utilitarianism is able to transcend the narrow view of

morality that only confines itself to the interest of the
individual (Ethical Egoism)
• The utilitarianism view that claims that humans by nature
seek what is pleasurable has been empirically observed and
tested
• Utilitarian ethical theory somehow provides a system with a
single and absolute moral principle with a potential answer
for every particular situation that anyone finds himself or
herself in.
Strong points of utilitarianism

• The categorization of pleasures escapes the simplistic view

on pleasure
• The hedonic calculus help us to determine which course of
action gives more pleasure or happiness
• The primary consideration of the consequences of actions as
the sole basis of morality affirms the common sense belief
that all our actions do have consequences and that more
importantly, they matter
• Utilitarianism to a large extent provides every ordinary man
and woman in the street a practical, simple and clear cut
procedure for making ethical decisions
• It allows for a great deal of flexibility and sensitivity to the
particular circumstances surrounding an action
• Utilitarianism finds various practical and specific applications
not just in the field of morality and ethics but also in the
area of politics, economies and business, among others
• A philosophy that considers one’s well being of equal value
with everyone else easily makes utilitarianism very
endearing and attractive to a kind of a democratic system
that gives everyone equal treatment in its rules and policies.
Weak points of utilitarianism

• Obvious difficulty and problem of knowing the exact

consequences of our actions
• It appears that utilitarianism justifies the doing of something
that is intrinsically wrong such as murder or stealing. The
end does not justify the means
• If we apply the theory of utilitarianism in all our actions, it
would be impractical since we simply do not have enough
time in all situations to weigh the pleasure or the pain that
an act brings
• The principle of the greatest good of the greatest number
does not give justice to the rights of the minority
• Utilitarianism simply ignores the role of motive or intention.
• Utilitarianism rejects all forms of moral duties that we
usually accept such as the duty to tell the truth, the duty to
help those in need and the duty to protect the innocent
• Utilitarianism seems to make goodness a mater of individual
taste and personal preference: “is an act good or right
because it is pleasurable or it is pleasurable because it is
good or right”
• What is happiness or pleasurable for one may not be
pleasurable for other
• Utilitarianism which only values actions that produce good
consequences, is a “heartless” ethical philosophy
• The utilitarian fundamental but subtle assumption that all
man’s actions are purposive is based on false psychology.
Distributive Justice

• The central question of distributive justice is

the question of how the benefits and
burdens of
our lives are to be distributed.
• Justice involves giving each person his or her
due.
• Equals are to be treated equally.
Basis for Distribution

•On what basis should goods be

distributed?
•Equality
•Individual needs or preferences
•Market transactions
•Ability to make best use of the goods
The Veil of Ignorance John RawlsImagine

• that people were asked to determine a

system of justice for a society without
knowing
there own circumstances within that society
(the
veil of ignorance)
• Each person would act out of self interest to
devise a system that would create the least
disadvantage for everyone (and themselves!)
A probable outcome

• Maximise Liberty
• Each person is to have an equal right to the most
extensive total system of equal basic liberties
compatible with a system of liberty for all.
• Minimise inequalities
• Social inequalities are to be allowed only if
• Social advantages are open to all under
conditions of fair equality of opportunity to the greatest benefit of
the least advantaged
• 1 must be satisfied prior to 2, and 2a prior to 2b
Differential RewardsThe
• Difference Principle The extent to which we
should allow differences in distribution.
• Strict Equality
• If a system of strict equality would maximize the
position of the least advantaged in society, then
we should have strict equality.
• Planned Inequality
• If it is possible to improve the position of the
least advantaged further by inequality of income
and wealth then we should increase inequality to
the point where the position of the least
advantaged can no longer be raised.
Critics of the Difference PrincipleStrict

• Egalitarians
• We ought not treat anyone differently
• Utilitarian
• It does not maximise the good
• Libertarian
• Infringes personal liberties through taxation,
etc.
• Desert-based theorists
• We ought to reward hard work even when it doesnt
help the disadvantaged
Resource-Based Approaches Ronald Dworkin

• Accepting Consequences
• People who choose to work hard to earn more
income should not be required to subsidise those
choosing more leisure and less income.
• People should not suffer the consequences of
circumstances over which they have no control
• people born with handicaps, ill-health, or low
levels of natural endowments have not brought
these circumstances upon themselves
THE END