UTILITARIANISM

• One of the best known and most influential moral

theories. Like other forms of consequentialism, its
core idea is that whether actions are morally right or
wrong depends on their effects.
• Actions are morally permissible if and only if they
produce at least as much net happiness as any other
available actions.
ETHICAL JUDGEMMENT
• Ethical philosophy differs from the science because it
is normative or prescriptive , rather than descriptive.
• In other words, ethics tell us how we ought to act or
what we should do, while the sciences are more likely
to observe how things are in nature or society.
MAKING ETHICAL JUDGEMENTS IN
UTILITARIANISM
• Utilitarianism says that the RESULT or the
CONSEQUENCES of an Act is the real measure of whether
it is good or bad.
• This theory emphasizes ENDS OVER MEANS.
• Theories, like this one, that emphasize the results or
consequences are called the TELEOLOGICAL or
CONSEQUENTIALIST.
FOUR THESES OF UTILITARIANISM

• Consequentialism: The rightness of action is determined solely by their consequences.

• Hedonism: The utility is the degree to which an act produce pleasure.Hedonism is the
thesis that pleasure or happiness is the good that we seek and that we should seek.
• Maximilizm: A right action produces good and the least bad.
• Universalism: The consequences to be considered are those of everyone affected, and
everyone equally.
TWO
F O R M U L AT I O N S
O F U T I L I TA R I A N
• Principle of Utility • Greatest Happiness
The best action is that We ought to do that
which produces the which produces the
greatest happiness greatest happiness and
and/or reduces pain. least pain for the
greatest number of
people.
T WO T YPES OF
UTILITARIANIS
M
• Act
An action is right if and only if it produces
the greatest balance of pleasure over pain
for the greatest number.
• Rule
An action is Right if and only if it
conforms to a set pf rules the general
acceptance of which would produce the
greatest balance of pleasure over pain for
the greatest number.
THE MOST IMPORTANT CLASSICAL
UTILITARIANS
• Jeremy Bentham • John Stuart Mill
JEREMY BENTHAM
• According to Bentham, the most acts are those that maximize
pleasure and minimize pain.
• This has sometimes been called the “Utilitarian Calculus”. An act
would be moral if it brings the greatest amount of pleasure and the
least amount of pain.
• Bentham said: ‘An act is right if it delivers more pleasure than pain
and wrong if it brings about more pain than pleasure’
• By adding up the amounts of Pleasure and pain for each possible act
we should be able to choose the good thing to do.
BENTHAM’S HEDONIC CALCULUS
1. The intensity of the pleasure
2. The duration of pleasure
3. The certainty of pleasure
4. The remoteness of the pleasure
5. The chance of succession of pleasure
6. The Purity of pleasure
7. The extent of pleasure
BENTHMAN'S UTILITY
• Benthman's Utilitarianism is a universal hedonism.
• What is right is which is calculated to bring about greatest
balance of good over evil, where good is as defined as
pleasure or happiness.
• Benthman's view is described as Act Utilitarianism.
• Benthman' argued that we should be guided by the principle
of utility and not by rules.
JOHN STUART MILL
• Mill said: 'The Greatest happness Principles holds that actions are right
in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, 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'
• 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 not also considered as well as quantity
• Mill differs Benthman's quantitative approach.
UNIVERSABILITY
• Mill says that in order to derive the principle of the
greatest good (happiness) for the greatest number
we need the principle of Universability.
• He says: ' Each person's happiness is a good to that
person, and the general happiness, therefore, is a
good to the aggregate of all persons.'
QUALITY OF PLEASURE
• According to Mill, quality of pleasure employs the use of
higher faculties.
• He is answering the objection to Benthman's approach
that utilitarians are just pleasure-seekers.
• Mills says that the quality of pleasure that satisfies a
human is different from that which satisfies animal.
RULE UTILITARIANISM
• Another aspect of Mill's approach is the idea that
there need to be some moral rules in order to
establish social order and justice - but the rules
should be those which, it followed universally,
would most likely produce the greatest happiness.
BENTHMAN VS. MILL
• Benthman • Mill
1. The greatest good (pleasure) for thr 1. The greatest happiness for the greater
greates number number
2. Focused on the individual alone 2. We should protect the common good,
3. Quantitative-Hedonic Calculus universalistic

4. Act Utilitarianism 3. Qualitative-higher lower pleasure

5. In search of maximization of happiness 4. Rule Utilitarianism

6. Consequentialist 5. Consequentialist
THE ULTIMATE
SANCTION
External sanctions like those that emanate from social and supernatural sources
enforce the utilitarian principle, they do not compel one to follow it.
One of the external sanctions that provide the impetus for moral conduct is one’s
fear of displeasing God.
Other external sanction is the fear of disapproval from other people
Ultimately, according to Mill, it is man’s “feeling for humanity” that constitutes the
ultimate sanction of the principle of utility. This is the internal sanction of the
principle of utility.
The aim of utilitarianism, therefore, is to promote a moral way of life that considers
the welfare of the community and not just one’s own, such that Mill declares that it
is the internal sanction of conscience which serves as the ultimate sanction of the
principle of the utility.
Bentham’s version of utilitarianism focuses on the potential amount or quantity
of happiness that an action can potentially produce for it to be considered right,
Mill’s ethics makes a sharp and nuanced division of higher and lower forms of
pleasure in terms of quality.
Although both agree that an action’s rightness or wrongness must take into
account the number of those that shall be affected.
Mill says that the pleasures of a higher quality are those that employ our
distinctively human faculties, such as the intellect.
However, it should be noted that Mill is not saying that people who have
experienced both the pleasures of sensation and pleasures of the intellect
consistently prefer the latter on every occasion. In other words, a wise man
would not exchange his lot for that of a fool’s even if he were promised the
pleasure’s benefiting of a fool’s for a lifetime.
Mill does not assert that the exercise of distinct human faculties
like the intellect has a greater intrinsic value than the exercise of
those that promote the pleasures of sensation. What he claims is
that the pleasures derived from uniquely human activities such as
reading, conversing with others, and philosophizing have superior
value than other forms of activities.
Mill’s moral theory is considered as consequentialist in that it
judges the rightness and wrongness of actions based on their
consequences.
STRENGTH AND
WEAKNESSES OF
U T I L I TA R I A N I S M
STRENGTHS
• It is straightforward and based on the single principle of minimizing
pain and maximizing pleasure and happiness
• It relates to actions which can be observed in the real world.
• Its consequentialism is also a strength, as when we act it only
natural to weigh up the consequences.
• Utilitarianism's acceptance of the universal principle is essential for
any ethical system
• The idea of promoting the 'well-being' of the greatest number is
also important
WEAKNESSES
• The qualitative and quantitative approaches pose
problems
• Utilitarianism does not consider motives and intentions
and so rejects the principle of treating people with
intrinsic value. Utilitarianism can be seen as too
impersonal and does not consider the rights of
individuals in its attempt to look for the' greater good.'
SUMMARY
• Utilitarianism has some major weaknesses as fas
as duty, justice, motives, intensions and
consequences are concerned, and the principles
of 'tge greatest good for the greatest number' and
'treating people as a means to an end' are rather
dubious moral principles.