Utilitarianism as an Ethical Theory

or Framework
• “Utilitarianism” is an example of a “Consequentialist” ethical
theory/framework •
Consequentialism is an ethical theory or framework that
identifies the moral value of an action with its outcome (or
“consequence”). –
 Implication: the moral value of an action is not to be found in
itself, but in what it can bring about. •
 Contrast Consequentialism against [more on this later]:
 – Virtue Ethics: an action is good if it contributes to the
formation of a virtuous character
– Natural Law Theory: an action is good if it follows the Natural
Law
– Deontology: an action is good in itself because it follows duty
The term “utilitarianism” is derived from the root word
“utility,” generally meaning “the quality or state of
being useful.” •
From the Latin utilis, “useful,” from uti, “to use” •
But the ethical theory of Utilitarianism is not to be
confused simply with a typical sense of “usefulness”: –
i.e., practical in the technical or economic sense • …
instead it refers to a valuing the action that brings
about the “greatest happiness for the greatest number.”
– …and that is what is “most useful,” in this sense
Classical Utilitarianism
• Classical Utilitarianism (CU) was formed by two British
thinkers in the 18th-19th centuries: – Jeremy Bentham –
John Stuart Mill • CU was formulated by Bentham and Mill
in response to the need for legal and social reform in
Britain • CU is characterized by: – “Hedonism” • “Pleasure”
is what is “good” – Impartiality • The happiness of one
counts the same as everyone else’s • It does not matter if it
is the agent’s happiness or somebody else’s; it does not
matter if it is the king’s or the beggar’s happiness –
“Instrumentality” • Of the action: No action is “morally
good” or “morally bad” in itself; the important thing is the
consequence
Classical Utilitarianism
 Jeremy Bentham •1748-1832
 •English philosopher, jurist, reformer •
Works include: A Fragment on Government (1776),
An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and
Legislation (1780/9), Anarchical Fallacies (1796/1816)
Jeremy Bentham’s Utilitarianism
• From Introduction to the Principles of Morals and
Legislation, 1789 • Pain and pleasure are the two
“sovereign masters” of the human being.
– The ultimate cause of a human’s action is to achieve
a pleasure or to avoid a pain •
The Principle of Utility is “that principle which
approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever,
according to the tendency which it appears to have to
augment or diminish the happiness of the party
whose interest is in question…”
Jeremy Bentham’s Utilitarianism
•“By utility is meant that property of any object,
whereby it tends to produce benefit, advantage,
pleasure, good, or happiness…or what comes again to
the same thing…to prevent the happening of mischief,
pain, evil, or unhappiness to the party whose interest
is considered: if that party be the community in
general, then the happiness of the community: if a
particular individual, then the happiness of that
individual.” – To this end, Bentham came up with
what he called a “felicific calculus,” that is, a
“happiness calculator, or counter.”
Bentham’s Felicific Calculus
Consider the following circumstances to measure the
value of pleasures and pains an action can bring about:
 1. Intensity
 2. Duration
3. Certainty vs Uncertainty
4. Propinquity vs Remoteness
5. Fecundity
6. Purity
7. Extent
Bentham’s Felicific Calculus
• One who is faced with deciding on whether an action is to be
done or not must ask oneself whether the action will bring
about greater X than an alternative action [“X” referring to one
of the circumstances Bentham mentioned]. – Will action A
bring about greater intensity of pleasure than action B? – Will
action A bring about the greater intensity of pain than action B?
– Ex: Using cocaine.
 • But if more than one of the circumstances are involved in an
action, all the other amounts of pleasure and pain must be
accounted for – Ex: Buying a new pair of rubber shoes (Brand
N). – One is therefore reminded that even a seemingly
innocuous act might turn out to have “systemic” effects (ex: to
the environment, to conditions elsewhere, etc.) • If the net
amount to be produced by an action leans towards pleasure
rather than pain, then action A is “good.”
John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism
• From Utilitarianism, 1861 • JS Mill adds a qualitative
dimension to Bentham’s purely quantitative one.
 • Mill’s Greatest Happiness Principle is still hedonistic,
since it: – “…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.” • But
Mill’s version modifies Bentham’s: – “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.”
John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism
• Mill’s famous quote, on comparing Socrates and a fool on
the pleasures they respectively desire: – “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, is 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’s famous quote, on comparing Socrates and a fool on
the pleasures they respectively desire: – “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, is 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.
John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism
Mill’s synthesis of the goal of Utilitarianism for an
individual: – “According to the Greatest Happiness
Principle…the ultimate end, with reference to and for
the same of which all other things are desirable…is an
existence exempt as far as possible from pain, and as
rich as possible in enjoyments, both in point of
quantity and quality; the test of quality, and the rule
of measuring it against quantity, being the preference
felt by those who, in their opportunities of experience,
to which must be added their habits of self-
consciousness and self-observation, are best furnished
with the means of comparison.
Utilitarianism vs the Other Ethical
Frameworks
• Utilitarianism vs Virtue Ethics – VE focuses on the
development of one’s character: • The virtuosity of an act
lies in its potential contribution to the formation of an
excellent character – UT focuses on “act-evaluation” rather
than “character evaluation”: • Will action X bring about
the Greatest Good for the Greatest Number (GGftGN)?
• Utilitarianism vs Natural Law Theory – NL: certain
actions are wrong in themselves, because they go against
the precepts of the Natural Law (i.e., they are “unnatural”)
– UT: actions are “good” only in an instrumental sense,
never in an intrinsic sense