Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Utilitarianism - Coggle Diagram

- - - - ?
    - - offers a common currency of moral thought that seems relatively straightforward ton apply
      - various concerns of different interest groups can be accommodated and weighed against one another differently
      - can look at the options and take into account all of the different claims
    - - allows to apply to ow situations and also into the future
    - - belives that humans seek pleasure and try to avoid pain
    - - many people automatically make utilitarian judgments
  - - - tries to solve the problem of minoryty groups being discounted d
  - - - in ones best self inetrest
- - - - we are naturally more inclined to do things that bring us pleasure and more likely to avoid those things that cause us pain
- - - - can't know the future and things rarely turn out as we think
      - cannot be right to judge an action right or wrong based on outcomes that are down to chance
    - - even if you knew exactly what would happen, it is impossible to add up all of the pain and pleasure resulting from a course of action
        
        Lous Pojman picks up on this
        
        'The calculus is encumbered with too many variables and has problems assigning scores to the variables. For instance, what score do we give a cool drink on a hot day or warm shower on a cool day? How do we compare a 5 - year old's delight ever a new toy with a 30 - year old's delight with a new lover?'
    - - more fundamental flaw
        
        may be possible to think of ways to measure the certainty and duration of the pleasure/pais arising from a particular action (perhaps based on past experience )
  - - - to seek the greatest happiness for the greatest number in all situations
        
        meaningful moral theory requires general rules of some kind
        
        Kant would argue that it is a part of the very meaning of moral judgements that they have to be universalise into general laws of conduct
    - - which Mill counteracts with th non harm principle
    - - strong tendency in our moral understanding to regard our obligations to others as different depending on who they are
        
        for example if a mother whose child is about to be run over has a special duty to save it and would be justified in ignoring the plight of others at the risk whereas Bentham says that she should be solely concerned with the happiness of humanity as a whole and not the happiness of her loved one
    - - reject the theory as it allows horrendous acts to be permitted, just because a majority want it
    - - example of innocent scapegoat, if we could demnstrate it in order to prevent massive harm (perhaps further rioting r a civil war) we must execute an innocent person then it seems as if Bentha thinks we should kill that person
        
        however this is fundamentally unjust and B is keen to ensure that there is justice in the penal system
        
        it goes against all our intuitions to say that it is morally good to kill, trture, lie or deprive people of their freedom even if it does lead to beneficial consequences for the majority
    - - concerned t highlight the dangers of a utilitarian thinking
  - - - , chikdren may not have this - are they then incapable of being moral?
    - - save a kid from drowning but the kid grows to be a mass murderer
  - - - requires us that we are able to make a reasonable prediction of outcome of the action but it is not always obvious what the effects of telling the truth vs telling a lie are in any given circumstances
    - - in his thought experiment of 'Jim and the Indians' Bernard Williams gives a situation where a utilitarian can save ten lives by killing one person themself. he agree that even if this were the right thing to do, we'd find it difficult because we are moral agent who have to live with ourselves after the act
  - - - creatures such as pigs enjoy quite simple pleasures eg eating leftover food and rolling in the mud - we are capable of higher pleasures
      - M more interested in quality of each pleasure arguing there are two types of pleasures:
        
        lower pleasures
        
        there are pleasures of the body that both humans and other creatures enjoy, such as food, sleep and sex
        
        higher pleasures
        
        there are intellectual and social pleasures that only human being can enjoy, such as intellectual conversation or enjoyment of art
      - B's Act is quantitative and appears to suggest that we can coldly calculate the pleasure and pain involved in each situation
- - - - How soon will pleasure happen
    - - How probable is pleasure
    - - How likely that pleasure happens
    - - How unlikely to lead to pain
    - - How long is the pleasure
    - - How many people
    - - How strong is the pleasure