Transcript moral philosophy - The Richmond Philosophy Pages

MORAL PHILOSOPHY
DECISIONS AND TRUTH
Moral philosophy or ethics…
(1)
Normative ethics. Theories addressing the questions of how we
ought to act or how we should be. What is the basis on which we
should make decisions about what we ought to do. The central
concern of normative ethics is an elucidation of what is right, good or
virtuous.
(2)
Meta-ethics. Theories concerning the nature of moral judgements.
Key questions focus on whether our moral statements can be true or
false or whether moral judgements are instead basically subjective
expressions of feeling, attitude or agreement. The implications for
moral knowledge and moral psychology (motivation).
(3)
Applied ethics. The examination of and attempt to understand
practical moral problems such as abortion, euthanasia, animal welfare,
suicide, poverty, the environment (and our relationship to it)…
Normative ethics

Key questions: (1) what should one do? (2) How should one be?

These questions are not equivalent.

Difference on what is at the centre of ethical reasoning.

(1) places our actions centre-stage. Ethical theory articulates the
criterion(a) by which actions and so persons are judged. An action may
be evaluated in terms of its good or bad consequences. Or, it may be
judged as the right or wrong thing to do by reference to the motivations
of the agent and her duties.

(2) begins with the idea of what makes for a flourishing or worthwhile
life. This is not to ignore the necessity and importance of acting, but
rather locates action and agency within an account of the psychology
and social relations constitutive of the good life for an individual.

The first conception finds expression in consequentialist and deontic
(duty-based) theories and the second in virtue theory.
Three big theories
1.
2.
3.
Utilitarianism – maximising the good
consequences.
Deontology – acting in accordance with
duty.
Virtue ethics – possessing a virtuous
character.
Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory.

The moral evaluation of actions depends on the
goodness or badness of their consequences: the good is
prior to the right.

Teleological or goal directed approach – an action is
good if it produces good outcomes

Outcomes evaluated from an impartial standpoint to
determine best-worst.
Utilitarian theories…
Roughly –
•
•
•
Act - do that act which taken on its own will
maximise general happiness.
Rule - act in accordance with rules, the
adherence to which will maximise general
happiness.
Preference - act so as to satisfy people’s
preferences.
Classical utilitarianism: Bentham and hedonic act utilitarianism
Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) – social
reformer and campaigner.

The right thing to do is determined by a
consideration of what action produces the
greatest level of overall happiness or utility.
Why aim at maximising utility?

The consequentialist intuition – it must be better to bring about
better rather than worse states of affairs.
Plus a theory about the nature of what is valuable 
Thesis that it is only pleasure or happiness which is intrinsically
valuable - valuable in its own right or ‘as such’.

One intrinsically valuable state of affairs which is the experience of
pleasure.

Everything else is extrinsically valuable only in relation the intrinsic
value or goodness of pleasure.

Underpins the view that morality should aim at the maximisation of
the overall level of utility. For what else could its end be?
Why aim at maximising utility? … equality

A theory focused on maximising outcomes emphasises
the equality of individuals. Each person’s interests
treated with equal consideration.

Taking everyone as morally equal we decide what is
right by judging which act maximises overall well-being:
people matter and matter equally; each person is given
equal weight; so, the act that maximises outcomes is the
right one.

Maximisation is a means of arriving at a decision which
takes each person and their interests as possessed of
equal importance. Something like this approach is found
in Bentham and Mill.
Why aim at maximising utility?

Bentham’s picture of human psychology – influenced by the
empiricist tradition of Hobbes and Hume.

Mankind governed by pain and pleasure. Nature has placed
mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters,
pain and pleasure… They govern us in all we do, in all we
say, in all we think: every effort we can make to throw off our
subjection, will serve but to demonstrate and confirm it. In
words a man may pretend to abjure their empire: but in reality
he will remain subject to it all the while. The principle of
utility recognises this subjection, and assumes it for the
foundation of that system.
Immediate worries

Measurement

The nature of utility – is it just how I feel?

Hedonic v. non-hedonic (or ideal) accounts of utility.

Eating pork pies, watching Eastenders, going to the
opera, reading great literature, doing philosophy…
Can they be measured by the same yardstick?
Sense in which they are equal?
Reading

‘Doing the right thing: part 1’ RJP 19
Classical utilitarianism: Mill

Development of Bentham – an increased sophistication in our
psychology and the components of happiness.
On Bentham - Man is never recognised by him as a being capable
of pursuing spiritual perfection as an end; of desiring, for its own
sake, the conformity of his own character to his standard of
excellence, without the hope of good or fear of evil from other
source than his inward consciousness.

But a fundamental agreement on the greatest happiness principle
The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the Greatest
Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend
to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of
happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by
unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure.
To give a clear view of the moral standard set up by the theory, much more
requires to be said; in particular, what things it includes in the ideas of pain
and pleasure; and to what extent this is left an open question.
But these supplementary explanations do not affect the theory of life on
which this theory of morality is grounded - namely, that pleasure, and
freedom from pain, are the only things desirable as ends; and that all
desirable things (which are as numerous in the utilitarian as in any other
scheme) are desirable either for the pleasure inherent in themselves, or as
means to the promotion of pleasure and the prevention of pain.

Higher and lower pleasures

Connection with Aristotle? Mill not committed to
Aristotle's essentialism. He is not seeking to argue
from a view of human nature to the conclusion that
because certain activities or capacities are
essentially human, we therefore ought to lead a
certain kind of life. Rather, it is because we have
these distinctive capacities that we will not be fully
satisfied by any happiness that does not involve
their exercise.

The Proof - not a formal proof or argument to
establish normative truth from naturalistic
premises. An attempt to establish plausibility
(at least) of principle of utility.
Deeper problems…

Act utilitarianism is unsustainable.

On each occasion, an agent should decide what to do by calculating which act would
produce the most good.

But – Many agents don’t have the information needed to make the right decision.

Obtaining the necessary information might involve greater pain than what is at stake
in the dilemma to be resolved.

Individuals may well make mistakes, especially if they have a vested interest or they
are in a hurry.

Expectation effects – if we know everyone else is prepared to break promises, steal,
lie, and so on in order to maximise pleasure, then we may find our trust in others
destroyed and finish up with a community which is much less likely to produce
happiness.

So, move to rule utilitarianism

But, this faces a coherence challenge.

It either permits exceptions to the rules to
allow maximisation of outcomes or I must
stick to the rules and so am forced to act
against the basic utilitarian principle.
Two big problems

Utilitarianism permits morally horrific acts.

Utilitarianism cannot recognise the moral
significance of individual integrity and of
one’s commitments and projects.

Reading – ‘Doing the right thing: part 2’.