Lesson

Utilitarianism
 Terms
• Utility: a state of being useful, beneficial
• Greatest Happiness principle: a teaching that holds that the best thing to do is what
contributes to the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people.
• Higher Pleasure: depend on distinctively human capacities, which have a more complex
cognitive element, requiring abilities such as rational thought, self-awareness.
• Base Pleasure: particular pleasures such as gluttony,sex, etc
• Moral Right: right that has justified claim, entitlement or assertion of what a rights-
holder is due.

• 
 Terms
• Teleological: relating to or involving the explanation of phenomena in
terms of the purpose they serve rather than of the cause of which they
arise; relating to the doctrine of design and purpose in the material world.
• Consequentialism: an ethical theory that judges whether or not
something is right by what its consequences are.
• Hedonist: a person who believes that the pursuit of pleasure is the most
important thing in life; a pleasure- seeker.


 What is Utilitarianism?
• Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that argues for the goodness of pleasure
and the determination of right behavior based on the usefulness of the
action’s consequences.
• This means that pleasure is good and that the goodness of an action is
determined by its usefulness (Bulaong Jr., et al, 2018).
• Utilitarianism says that the Result or the Consequence of an Act is the real
measure of whether it is good or bad.

 What is Utilitarianism?

• Utilitarianism claims that one’s actions and behavior are good inasmuch as they
are directed toward the experience of the greatest pleasure over pain for the
greatest number of persons (Bulaong Jr, et al, 2018).
• This theory emphasizes Ends over Means.
• Theories, like this one, that emphasize the results or consequences are called
teleological or consequentialist.
• Happiness/Pleasure (felt by greatest number of persons) Good
• Sadness/Pain (felt by greatest number of persons) Bad
 Jeremy Bentham
• In the book An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation
(1789), Jeremy Bentham begins by arguing that our actions are governed
by two “great masters”: which Bentham calls: Pleasure and Pain.
• These “masters” are given to us by nature to help us determine what is
good and bad and what ought to be done and not; they fasten our choices
to their throne (Bulaong Jr., et al, 2018)
 Jeremy Bentham
• The principle of utility is about our subjection to these great masters:
Pleasure and Pain. On one hand, the principle refers to the motivation of
our actions as guided by our avoidance of pain and our desire for pleasure.
Bentham equates happiness with pleasure. (Bulaong Jr., et al, 2018). The
great good that we should seek is happiness. (a hedonistic perspective)
• On the other hand, the principle also refers to pleasure as good if and only
if, they produce more happiness than unhappiness (Bulaong Jr., et al,
2018). Those actions whose results increase happiness or diminish pain
are good. They have “utility.”
 How to determine the moral preferability of
actions in relation to pleasure and pain?
• In determining the quantity of happiness that might be
produced by an action, Bentham called it Felicific Calculus.
Felicific Calculus is a common currency framework that
calculates the pleasure that some actions can produce
(Bentham, 1970)
 Felicific Calculus
1. Intensity/ strength of Pleasure Indicators to
2. Duration/ length of the experience of Pleasure measure pleasure
3. Certainty or uncertainty, or the likelihood that pleasure will and pain in action
occur
4. Propinquity or remoteness or how soon there will be pleasure

5. Fecundity or the chance it has of being followed by sensations Indicators to evaluate

of the same kind. our tendency to choose
6. Purity or the chance it has of not being followed by sensations these actions
of the opposite kind.
7. Extent Number of persons
who are affected by
pleasure or pain
 Jeremy Bentham
• Felicific calculus allows the evaluation of all actions and their resultant
pleasure. This means that actions are evaluated on this single scale
regardless of preference and values. In this sense, pleasure and pain can
only quantitatively differ but not qualitatively differ from other
experiences of pleasure and pain accordingly (Bulaong Jr., et al, 2018)
 John Stuart Mill
• John Stuart Mill agrees with Bentham on the moral value of
pleasure.
• Mill supports Bentham’s Principle of Utility.
• He reiterates moral good as happiness and consequently, happiness
as pleasure (Mill, 1907).
• Mill clarifies that what makes people happy is intended pleasure and
what makes people unhappy is the privation of pleasure.
 John Stuart Mill
• But Mill disagrees with Bentham’s single scale of pleasure.
• Mill asserts that the principle of Utility must be distinguish qualitatively and
not mere quantitatively.
• For Mill, utilitarianism cannot promote the kind of pleasure appropriate to
pigs or to any other animals.
• He asserts that there are higher intellectual and lower base pleasures.
• Human beings, as moral agents, are capable of searching and desiring higher
intellectual pleasures more than animals are capable of (Bulaong Jr., et al,
2018).
 John Stuart Mill
• For instance, when we only desire sensuality which is considered lower based
pleasure shared by animals, what makes us different from animals? Instead,
we only undermines ourselves capable of desiring for higher intellectual
pleasure.
• Mill claims that there are different kinds of pleasures:
“It is quite compatible with the principle of utility to recognize the fact that some kinds of
pleasure are more desirable and more valuable than others. It would be absurd that while, in
estimating all other things, quality is considered as well as quantity, the estimation of pleasure
should be supposed to depend on quantity alone.”( Mill, 1907)
 John Stuart Mill
• Mill argues that quality is more preferable than quantity as Bentham asserted.
An excessive quantity of what is otherwise pleasurable might result in pain
(Bulaong Jr., et al, 2018).
• For instance:
VS

(Quantity) (Quality)
Excessive Eating Eating the right amount of food
Not good Good
 How to we decide over two comparable
pleasures?
In order to decide over two comparable pleasures, according to Mill, we need to
experience both and to discover which one is actually more preferred than the others (Mill,
1907). There is other way of determining which of the two pleasures is preferable except
by appealing to the actual preferences and experiences. What Mill discovers
anthropologically is that actual choices of knowledgeable persons point that higher
intellectual pleasures are preferable than purely sensual appetites Mill, 1907).

Which do you prefer?

Going to Sunday Mass? Going to Resto Bar?

 Two Formulations of Utilitarianism
Principle of Utility: Greatest Happiness:
The best action is that which We ought to do that which
produces the greatest produces the greatest
happiness and/or reduces happiness and least pain for
pain. the greatest number of people.
 Two Types of Utilitarianism
Act Utilitarianism Rule Utilitarianism (J.S. Mill)
(Jeremy Bentham) An action is right if and only if it
An Action is right if and only if it conforms to a set of rules the general
produces the greatest balance of acceptance of which would produce the
pleasure over pain for the greatest greatest balance of pleasure over pain
number. for the greatest number.
 Application of Utilitarianism
A. You attempt to help an elderly man across the street. He gets across safely. Conclusion: the
Act was a good act.
B.You attempt to help an elderly man across the street. You stumble as you go, he is knocked
into the path of a car, and is hurt.
Conclusion: The Act was a bad act
C. If you can use eighty soldiers as a decoy in war, and thereby attack an enemy force and
kill several hundred enemy soldiers, that is a morally good choice even though the eighty
might be lost.
D. If lying or stealing will actually bring about more happiness and/or reduce pain, Act
Utilitarianism says we should lie and steal in those cases.
 Criticism of Bentham’s Utilitarianism
Bentham’s theory could mean that if 10 people would be happy
watching a man being eaten by wild dogs, it would be a morally good
thing for the 10 men to kidnap someone (especially someone whose
death would not cause grief to many others) and throw the man into a
cage of wild, hungry dogs.
 John Stuart Mill’s Adjustments to
Utilitarianism
Mill argues that we must consider the quality of the happiness, not
merely the quantity.
For example, some might find happiness with a pitcher of beer and a
pizza. Others may find happiness watching a fine Shakespearean
play. The quality of happiness is greater with the latter.
 Mill’s Quality Arguments
“It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied
than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only
know their own side of the question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides.” (Mill,
1907)
“As between his own happiness and that of others, utilitarianism requires him to be as strictly
impartial as a disinterested and benevolent spectator. In the golden rule of Jesus of Nazareth, we
read the complete spirit of the ethics of utility. ‘To do as you would be done by,’ and ‘to love
your neighbor as yourself,’ constitute the ideal perfection of utilitarian morality.”(Mill, 1907)
 Criticisms of Utilitarianism
If I am to bring the greatest happiness to the greatest number, not putting my own happiness above others,
that may lead to a dilemma. I live in a neighborhood where 83% of my neighbors use drugs. I could make
them most happy by helping supply them with cheap drugs, but I feel uncomfortable doing that. What
should a utilitarian do?
Bernard Williams criticizes the implied “doctrine of negative responsibility” in Utilitarianism. For example,
a thug breaks into my home and holds six people hostage, telling us he will kill all of us. “However,” the
thug says, “if you will kill two of your family, I will let you and the other three live.” With Utilitarianism,
the good thing to do is to kill two members of my family.
Utilitarianism plays fast and loose with God’s commandments. If lying, stealing, or killing could lead to an
increase of happiness for the greatest number, we are told we should lie, steal or kill. Isn’t that a rejection of
God’s commands?