Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Consequentialism
Julia Driver, Ethics: The Fundamentals
pp. 61 – 66; 76 – 79
1
• All utilitarians are consequentialists.
• Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory insofar as it argues that the
morality of an action is to be evaluated by looking at consequences.
• But because utilitarians argue that the only thing that has value in itself
is happiness, or pleasure, or well-being, they end up justifying actions
that common moral sense tells us are immoral, or unjust.
2
• Consequentialists are dedicated to the utilitarian project of increasing
well-being in the world, but they also recognize that some of the
arguments against utilitarianism are serious.
• Some of the intrinsic values that consequentialists add apart from well-
being, are friendship or love, freedom, life, virtue, justice, etc.
3
• We can distinguish 3 big kinds of consequentialists:
- those who argue that actions should promote another value apart
from well-being
- those who argue that actions that promote well-being are moral to
the extent that they respect some moral rule
- those who argue not for the maximization of well-being, but for the
promotion of certain rights. According to them, nobody is ever justified
in violating rights for the sake of happiness or any other value.
4
We will illustrate some issues of the utilitarian theory that consequentialists try to eliminate.
1. Utilitarianism seems to overlook justice and rights.
5
• Imagine that there is a population of 100 people. If out of them 75
would work really hard, 25 would be able to enjoy lives of luxury and
develop their intellectual capacities. The 75 do not have unhappy
lives, but they would be much happier if they did not have to work
that much. But if they did not work that much the happiness of the
25 would decrease significantly, while the increase of their happiness
would not keep the overall happiness in the world at the same level
as it was when they were keeping the 25 extremely happy.
6
• Utilitarians end up promoting unjust choices partly because they
don’t treat individuals as ends in themselves. They think of people as
numbers in an equation for calcutating utility.
• Life is one’s most valuable thing. The value of someone’s life should
trump all utility- or other value-increasing calculations.
• Life is not only a value, it is also someone’s right.
7
Let us consider the thought experiment called “Transplant”:
• Imagine that there are five patients in a hospital that will die without an
organ transplant. The patient in Room 1 needs a heart, the patient in
Room 2 needs a liver, the patient in Room 3 needs a kidney, and so on.
The problem is that the doctors were not able to find compatible donors.
Until one day, when a person comes to the hospital for routine tests.
Luckily (for them, not for him!), his tissue proves to be compatible with
the other five patients, and a specialist is available to transplant his
organs into the other five. This operation would save their lives, while
killing the “donor”. There is no other way to save any of the other five
patients.
8
• 2. Utilitarians judge all acts from the observer's perspective. They
would judge the doctor's refuse to make the transplant to be wrong,
since the world with the transplant is better from an observer's
perspective.
- But there are some people with whom we have special relationships
- We value our friends, not simply the pleasure that they produce
- Special relationships involve special responsibilities or partial obligations
10
• 3. Utilitarians tried to eliminate the injustice criticism while still remaining
utilitarians. That is, not admitting that any other thing or right has absolute
value, but well-being.
- the utilitarian will also allow for the rule chosen to be overridden in
cases in which violating the rule will bring about considerably more utility
than not violating it → the rule is useless
- otherwise, utilitarians end up worshipping the rules, which can also
lead to injustice
11
Brad Hooker (1957 -) University of Reading
12
Rule consequentialism - an action is morally right just because it is
required by an optimific social rule.
An optimific social rule meets the following condition: if (nearly)
everyone in a society were to accept it, then the results would be
optimific.
According to Bradley Hooker, there are two, and only two, things of
intrinsic value—happiness and justice.
Optimific social rules will be ones that both increase happiness and
respect rights.
14
2. Classic utilitarianism seems to require that agents calculate all
consequences of each act for every person for all time. That's impossible.