UTILITARIANISM SCRIPT
SLIDE 1 UTILITARIANISM:
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that centers on the idea that the morality of an action is determined by
its overall consequences, specifically in terms of promoting happiness or pleasure and minimizing pain.
Rooted in the works of philosophers like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, utilitarianism holds that
the right course of action is the one that maximizes the collective well-being of individuals affected by
the action. Unlike some ethical frameworks that emphasize intentions or inherent qualities of actions,
utilitarianism is consequentialist, focusing on the outcomes. It provides that happiness is the ultimate
good and measures ethical decisions by their ability to generate the greatest amount of happiness for
the greatest number of people. Whether in its act or rule form, utilitarianism provides a straightforward
approach to moral decision-making, urging individuals to weigh the potential consequences of various
actions and choose the one that contributes most significantly to the overall welfare of society. However,
critics argue that this approach can sometimes lead to morally questionable conclusions, as it may
prioritize the majority's happiness at the expense of minority interests or endorse actions that seem
ethically problematic when assessed solely by their outcomes.
SLIDE # 2
An ethical theory that places the focus of right and wrong solely on the outcomes (consequences) of
choosing one action over other actions
Utilitarianism class places the focus of right and wrong solely on the outcomes or consequences
of choosing one action or policy over others is known as consequentialism. Consequentialism
asserts that the morality of an action is determined by the overall results it produces,
emphasizing the end rather than the means. In other words, the ethical value of an action is
derived from the positive or negative consequences it brings about, such as promoting
happiness, minimizing suffering, or maximizing some other desirable outcome. This perspective
stands in contrast to deontological ethics, which emphasizes adherence to moral principles or
duties regardless of the outcomes. Utilitarianism, a prominent form of consequentialism,
specifically that the morally right action is the one that leads to the greatest overall happiness.
Slide # 3. P1 Who is Jeremy Bentham
Jeremy Bentham was an English philosopher, jurist, and social reformer who is best known for
his development of utilitarianism. Born in London, Bentham was educated at Oxford University
and later studied law at Lincoln's Inn. His work had a significant impact on the fields of ethics,
political philosophy, and legal theory.
Slide 4 Benthams Principle of Utility
Jeremy Bentham's Principle of Utility is an important concept in his utilitarian philosophy. The principle is
also known as the greatest happiness principle and serves as the core idea behind utilitarianism.
Bentham articulated this principle in his book "Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,"
which was first published in 1789. The Principle of Utility states that the morally right action is the one
that maximizes overall happiness or pleasure and minimizes suffering or pain. In Bentham's utilitarian
calculus, individuals should assess the consequences of their actions in terms of the happiness produced.
The term "utility" refers to the perceived benefits or pleasures derived from an action.
1. In understanding the principle of utility Bentham Recognizes the fundamental role
of pain and pleasure in human life: Bentham's utilitarianism begins with the
acknowledgment that pain and pleasure are fundamental aspects of human
experience. He posits that all human actions can be understood in terms of the
pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain. By recognizing the centrality of
these experiences, Bentham lays the foundation for his ethical framework,
suggesting that the moral quality of an action is closely tied to the consequences
in terms of pleasure and pain.
2. Approves or disapproves of action on the basis of the amount of pain or
pleasure brought about, i.e., consequences: He points out that the Principle of
Utility is that the morality of an action is contingent upon its consequences.
Bentham argues that one should assess the overall amount of happiness
(pleasure) and unhappiness (pain) resulting from an action. Actions that lead to a
greater balance of pleasure over pain are considered morally right, while those
that result in more pain than pleasure are considered morally wrong. This
emphasis on consequences is a hallmark of consequentialist ethical theories.
SLIDE 5
3. Equates good with pleasure and evil with pain: Bentham equates what is
considered morally good with pleasure and what is morally evil with pain. This is
a key feature of utilitarianism. In this moral theory, the ultimate goal is the
promotion of happiness or pleasure, and actions that contribute to this goal are
deemed good, while those that bring about suffering or pain are deemed evil.
The ethical judgment, therefore, is closely tied to the hedonistic calculus of
pleasure and pain.
4. Asserts that pleasure and pain are capable of quantification (and hence
'measures'): One of the distinctive features of Bentham's utilitarianism is his
belief that pleasure and pain can be quantified and measured. He introduces the
felicific calculus, a method for assessing the quantity of pleasure and pain
associated with a particular action. Bentham suggests that these experiences can
be compared and evaluated in a systematic way, allowing individuals to
determine which actions are most likely to maximize overall happiness.
SLIDE 6
In measuring pleasure and pain ,Jeremy Bentham introduced the concept of the "felicific calculus" as a
method for measuring and comparing pleasure and pain. The felicific calculus is a set of criteria or
factors to be considered when evaluating the consequences of an action in terms of its impact on
pleasure and pain. Here are the criteria that Bentham proposed:
SLIDE 7
Intensity:
The intensity of pleasure or pain refers to how strong or weak the sensation is. Bentham argued that the
intensity of a pleasure or pain should be taken into account when assessing its overall impact. Strong
pleasures or pains would carry more weight in the calculation than weaker ones.
SLIDE 8
Duration:
Duration considers how long the pleasure or pain lasts. Bentham suggested that the duration of an
experience is relevant to its overall value. A pleasure or pain that lasts for an extended period would
contribute more to the calculation than a brief one.
SLIDE 9
Purity:
Purity involves the absence of pain accompanying a pleasure. Actions that result in pure pleasures,
without concomitant pain, are considered more valuable according to Bentham's calculus.
SLIDE 10
Certainty:
This criterion involves considering the likelihood or certainty of the pleasure or pain occurring. If an
action is likely to result in certain pleasure or pain, it would be given more weight than an action with
uncertain outcomes.
SLIDE 11
Propinquity or Remoteness:
Propinquity refers to how soon the pleasure or pain is likely to occur. Remoteness, on the other hand,
refers to how distant the pleasure or pain is in the future. According to Bentham, the closer in time a
pleasure or pain is, the more it should be taken into account in the calculation.
SLIDE 12
Fecundity:
Fecundity is the likelihood that an action will lead to more of the same kind of pleasure. If an action has
a high fecundity, meaning it is likely to result in more pleasure of a similar kind in the future, Bentham
argued that it should be given greater consideration.
These criteria Class were designed to guide individuals in evaluating the consequences of their actions.,
The felicific calculus remains important of his utilitarian philosophy. It illustrates his commitment to a
rational approach to ethical decision-making based on the principle of utility.
SLIDE 13
John Stuart Mill, born in 1806, was 19th-century philosopher, economist, and social reformer
who sought to refine and correct aspects of Jeremy Bentham's utilitarian theory. While sharing
the utilitarian commitment to the principle of utility, Mill criticized Benthams approch by arguing
that pleasures were not all equal and distinguished between higher and lower pleasures,
asserting that those associated with intellect and morality were inherently more valuable. Unlike
Bentham, Mill contended that utilitarianism was better suited as a guide for individual conduct
rather than a direct legislative principle. His nuanced approach aimed to address the limitations
of Bentham's theory, emphasizing the complexity of human experiences and the need to
safeguard individual liberties.
SLIDE 14
The Creed which accepts happiness as the foundation of morals utility or the greatest
happiness principle holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote
happiness and wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness
John Stuart Mill's greatest happiness principle, articulated in his work
"Utilitarianism," posits that the foundation of morals lies in the promotion of
happiness. According to this creed, actions are deemed right to the extent that
they contribute to the overall happiness or pleasure of individuals affected by
them, and they are considered wrong if they lead to the reverse—unhappiness
or pain. Mill's utilitarianism prioritizes the consequences of actions over their
inherent nature, advocating for a qualitative assessment of pleasure and pain.
Unlike a simple hedonistic calculus, Mill introduces the idea of higher and
lower pleasures, recognizing that some intellectual and moral pleasures are
inherently more valuable. This consequentialist approach guides ethical
decision-making by aiming to maximize the net balance of happiness and
minimize suffering, emphasizing the ultimate goal of morality as the well-
being of sentient beings.
SLIDE 15: He adjusted the more hedonistic tendencies in Bentham's philosophy by emphasizing:
1. It is not the quantity of pleasure, but the quality of happiness that is central to utilitarianism,
2. The calculus is unreasonable -- qualities cannot be quantified (there is a distinction between 'higher'
and 'lower' pleasures), and Instead, we look for explicit evidence such as direct quotations from the
text to illustrate our analysis.
John Stuart Mill made significant adjustments to the more hedonistic tendencies in Jeremy
Bentham's utilitarian philosophy by introducing key distinctions, emphasizing the quality of
happiness over mere quantity, and addressing the challenge of quantifying qualities. Firstly, Mill
challenged Bentham's quantitative approach by asserting that it's not merely the quantity of
pleasure that matters but also the quality of happiness. He introduced the idea of qualitative
hedonism, arguing that some pleasures are intrinsically more valuable than others. Mill's
distinction between 'higher' and 'lower' pleasures reflected this qualitative assessment,
suggesting that intellectual and moral pleasures have a superior quality. This changes aimed to
avoid the criticism that utilitarianism might endorse base or trivial pleasures if they were more
abundant. Secondly, Mill acknowledged the challenge of quantifying qualities in the hedonistic
calculus. He recognized that not all pleasures and pains could be precisely measured and
quantified.
SLIDE 16
So here we will look at the differences of lower pleasure and higher pleasure of John Stuart Mill
Lower pleasures are more immediate, sensory, and often associated with basic physical
and sensual gratifications. These pleasures are typically simpler and require less
intellectual or moral engagement.
lower pleasures are the kind of enjoyment we get from basic, immediate, and
sensory experiences. These are the simple, straightforward pleasures we get
from things like eating our favorite food, feeling the warmth of the sun, or
enjoying a relaxing nap. They don't require much thinking or moral
consideration; they are the simple joys we get from our senses. Lower
pleasures are more about satisfying our basic physical desires and enjoying
the simple, easy-to-grasp experiences in life.
SLIDE 17
Higher pleasures, according to Mill, are those that engage and stimulate the intellectual, moral, and
aesthetic faculties of individuals. These pleasures are often associated with activities that require
thought, reflection, and a higher level of sophistication.
Higher pleasures are the kind of joy we get from activities that make us think, reflect, and
engage our minds in a more sophisticated way. These are the pleasures we experience when
doing things like learning something new, appreciating art, or being morally good. Unlike simple
and immediate pleasures, higher pleasures involve a bit more complexity and often require us to
use our intellect, moral values, or appreciation for beauty. So, reading a good book, solving a
puzzle, or helping others can give us higher pleasures because they engage our minds and
morals in a deeper way.
SLIDE 18
Utilitarianism refers to "the Greatest Happiness Principle" -- it seeks to promote the
capability of achieving happiness (higher pleasures) for the most amount of people (this is
its "extent").
John Stuart Mill's utilitarianism is focused by the "Greatest Happiness
Principle," which is the ultimate goal of moral actions is to maximize overall
happiness or pleasure. In Mill's view, the quality of happiness is prioritized
over mere quantity. The principle also emphasizes the "extent" of happiness,
meaning that the moral worth of an action is determined by its ability to
promote happiness for the greatest number of individuals. In other words,
utilitarianism seeks to create the greatest amount of happiness for the largest
number of people. This signifies the importance of actions that contribute to
the well-being of a community rather than focusing solely on individual
happiness.
JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS BY JOHN RAWLS
SLIDE #1
JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS PROMOTING THE COMMON GOOD
SLIDE # 2
-Born February 21, 1921, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.—died November 24, 2002,
Lexington, Massachusetts
-Considered as the most important political philosopher of 20th century.
-Known for his defense of egalitarian liberalism in his major work, “A Theory of
Justice”
John Rawls, born on February 21, 1921, in Baltimore, Maryland, was a preeminent
political philosopher widely regarded as one of the most influential figures of the 20th
century. Rawls's lasting impact on political thought is largely attributed to his work, "A
Theory of Justice," published in 1971. In this text, Rawls advocated for a form of political
liberalism grounded in the principles of justice and fairness. He proposed a thought
experiment known as the "original position," where individuals, behind a veil of
ignorance regarding their own personal circumstances, would design a just society. This
aimed to ensure impartiality and eliminate biases that might arise from individuals'
particular social positions. Rawls argued for a distribution of social and economic goods
that prioritized the well-being of the least advantaged, emphasizing the importance of
equal basic liberties and fair opportunities for all citizens. His theory sought to reconcile
individual rights with a commitment to social justice, making Rawls a leading proponent
of egalitarian liberalism in the 20th century. His work has had a profound and enduring
influence on political philosophy, shaping debates on justice, equality, and the role of
the state in contemporary societies.
SLIDE #3
“Slavery is wrong in every situation for it does not respect the fundamental rights
of liberties of all persons.”
In the quote "Slavery is wrong in every situation for it does not respect the fundamental
rights and liberties of all persons" is an idea of John Rawls, particularly his influential
work on justice in his book "A Theory of Justice." The veil of ignorance, a key
component in Rawls's theory, leads to the rejection of societal structures that violate
fundamental rights and liberties. In the context of slavery, the statement suggests that,
from behind the veil of ignorance, individuals would universally reject a system that
undermines basic principles of fairness and equality. Slavery, being a clear violation of
these principles, is condemned as morally wrong in every situation according to Rawls's
framework. This perspective emphasizes the categorical rejection of slavery based on
principles that prioritize the protection of fundamental rights and liberties for all
individuals, reflecting a commitment to justice and equality in all circumstances.
SLIDE #4
TWO PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE
SLIDE # 5
THE LIBERTY PRINCIPLE
The Liberty Principle, also known as the "Equal Basic Liberties Principle," is one of the
two principles of justice that John Rawls established stating "Each person has an equal
claim to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic liberties which is compatible with a
similar scheme of liberties for others."
Rawls articulates three components of the Liberty Principle, each of which is
crucial in understanding his idea about the principles of justice:
a) Everybody has the same liberty which can never be taken away:
This component asserts that all individuals have an equal and inviolable claim to a set
of basic liberties. These basic liberties include political liberties (e.g., the right to vote
and run for office), personal liberties (e.g., freedom of speech and assembly), and
property rights. The emphasis on equality means that no one should have more
extensive basic liberties than others, and these liberties are protected from arbitrary
encroachment.
b) Provides basic and universal respect for individuals as minimum standards for
all:
The Liberty Principle establishes a foundational and universal standard of respect for
individuals. It sets the minimum threshold for the protection of basic liberties that must
be guaranteed to all members of society. This ensures that even in a just society with
significant economic and social inequalities, there exists a common baseline of
essential rights and freedoms that every individual is entitled to, regardless of their
social or economic status.
c) Limited but only for the sake of liberty:
Rawls acknowledges that certain limitations on individual liberties may be permissible
as long as these restrictions are designed to protect and enhance the overall system of
equal basic liberties. This means that any restrictions or inequalities should be justifiable
on the grounds that they contribute to the greater protection and advancement of the
fundamental liberties for all. Rawls places a priority on the principle of equal basic
liberties and permits deviations from strict equality only if they are necessary to ensure
the overall stability and effectiveness of the system.
SLIDE # 6
Consisted of Fair Equality of Opportunity and Difference Principle
RAWLS BELIEF ON SOCIETY:
Inevitability of Inequalities:
Rawls acknowledges that some level of inequality is inevitable in any society. However,
he emphasizes that these inequalities should be arranged in a way that benefits
everyone, particularly the least advantaged members of society. This idea aligns with
Rawls's Difference Principle, which permits social and economic inequalities only if they
work to the advantage of the least well-off.
Efforts to Lessen Inequalities:
Rawls argues that a just society should actively work to reduce and minimize social and
economic inequalities. The Fair Equality of Opportunity principle is central to this idea,
as it aims to eliminate arbitrary factors that might hinder individuals from pursuing and
obtaining opportunities. Rawls contends that by ensuring fair access to education,
employment, and other opportunities, societies can mitigate the impact of initial
inequalities and promote a more just distribution of resources and benefits.
Eradication of Discrimination and Access to Education:
Rawls places a strong emphasis on eradicating discrimination and providing universal
and equal access to education. These principles align with his commitment to fair
equality of opportunity. By eliminating discriminatory practices and ensuring that
everyone has access to quality education, regardless of their background, Rawls aims
to create a society where individuals can develop their talents and pursue their life goals
on an equal footing.
Property-Owning Democracy:
Rawls envisions a just society as a "property-owning democracy," where the ownership
of productive resources is broadly distributed. In this model, widespread ownership aims
to prevent the concentration of economic power and ensure that all citizens have a
stake in the economic system. Additionally, Rawls argues that even the least
advantaged members of society should be economically independent, meaning they
should have sufficient resources to participate as equals in social and economic life.
SLIDE # 7:
DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE
SLIDE # 8
John Rawls's concept of distributive justice revolves around creating a socially just
allocation of goods in a society. At its core, distributive justice addresses how resources
and benefits are distributed among individuals and aims to establish a fair and equitable
system. Rawls contends that the need for distributive justice arises when there are
incidental inequalities in outcomes, meaning that individuals in society have different
levels of access to resources, opportunities, and overall well-being due to various
circumstances.
Rawls's theory introduces the principles of justice as fairness, wherein he proposes the
Fair Equality of Opportunity and the Difference Principle. The Fair Equality of
Opportunity ensures that individuals, regardless of their background, have equal access
to positions, opportunities, and resources. This principle seeks to eliminate factors that
could create disparities in outcomes. The Difference Principle, on the other hand, allows
for social and economic inequalities as long as they benefit the least advantaged
members of society. In this way, Rawls addresses not only the fact of inequalities but
also the ethical dimensions of those inequalities by prioritizing the well-being of the least
privileged.
Distributive justice, according to Rawls, involves not only the quantities of goods but
also the processes by which goods are distributed. This includes examining the
structures and mechanisms in place to ensure fairness in the allocation of resources.
Moreover, distributive justice extends beyond the immediate distribution of goods; it also
considers the subsequent impact on society members. Rawls emphasizes the
importance of creating a system that not only produces just outcomes but also takes
into account the well-being and opportunities available to all individuals in the aftermath
of resource allocation.
SLIDE #9
TYPES OF DISTRIBUTIVE NORM
Equity (Based upon Inputs):
This norm is grounded in the idea that individuals should be rewarded based on their
contributions or inputs to society. In Rawls's framework, this aligns with the concept of
Fair Equality of Opportunity. Rawls argues for a system where individuals have an equal
chance to compete for positions and opportunities based on their skills, talents, and
efforts.
Equality (Regardless of Input):
The principle of equality corresponds to Rawls's Difference Principle, which permits
social and economic inequalities only if they benefit the least advantaged. In this
context, equality means that everyone, regardless of their individual inputs or
contributions, receives an equal share. Rawls places emphasis on creating a just
society where the distribution of resources is such that it improves the position of the
least well-off.
Power (Control or Authority):
This norm reflects the influence of those with control or authority in the distribution of
resources. It connects with the broader idea of social and economic structures and how
those in positions of power may have advantages in the distribution of goods. Rawls, in
his theory, seeks to ensure that inequalities in power do not translate into unjust
advantages in the distribution of resources.
Need:
The need-based norm aligns with Rawls's concern for the well-being of the least
advantaged. The Difference Principle, which permits inequalities that benefit the least
well-off, can be seen as addressing the needs of those who are in the greatest need.
Rawls emphasizes the importance of societal arrangements that prioritize the welfare of
the most vulnerable members.
Responsibility:
This norm suggests that those who have more resources or advantages should share
with others. In Rawls's theory, the idea of responsibility aligns with the social contract
and the idea that individuals in a just society have a duty to contribute to the well-being
of the community. This is in line with the notion of reciprocity and mutual cooperation
that underpins Rawls's principles of justice.
SLIDE 10
SOCIO-ECONOMIC POLITICAL THEORIES RELATED TO DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE
1. Egalitarianism:
Egalitarianism is a set of closely related socio-economic and political theories that
advocate for the equal distribution of resources, opportunities, and benefits within a
society. The core principle of egalitarianism is that every individual should have equal
access to essential goods and services, and societal structures should aim to minimize
or eliminate economic and social inequalities. Egalitarian theories argue for the
reduction of disparities in wealth, income, and power, promoting a vision of a society
where everyone is afforded equal standing and opportunities. Egalitarian approaches
often involve policies such as progressive taxation, social welfare programs, and
affirmative action to address historical and systemic inequalities.
2. Capitalist (Laissez-Faire):
Capitalism, particularly in its purest form known as laissez-faire capitalism, is an
economic system where businesses and individuals operate with minimal government
intervention. In a capitalist system, the market is driven by individual self-interest,
competition, and the forces of supply and demand. While capitalism has been
successful in fostering innovation and economic growth, pure laissez-faire capitalism
can lead to significant wealth and income inequalities. Critics argue that unregulated
markets tend to concentrate resources in the hands of a few, resulting in social and
economic disparities. Some capitalist systems incorporate regulatory measures,
progressive taxation, and social safety nets to address these inequalities and ensure a
more just distribution of wealth and opportunitie
SLIDE 11
3. Socialist:
Socialism is a socio-economic and political theory advocating for collective or
governmental ownership and control of the means of production, distribution, and
exchange. In a socialist system, the government or a central authority plays a significant
role in directing economic activities and ensuring that wealth and resources are
distributed more equitably among the population. Socialism aims to address class
disparities and promote economic and social justice. The extent of government control
can vary, ranging from democratic socialism, where there is democratic decision-
making alongside state ownership, to more centrally planned socialist models.
4. Democratic Socialism:
Democratic socialism represents a synthesis of socialist and democratic principles. In a
democratic socialist system, there is an emphasis on combining the economic planning
characteristic of socialism with democratic governance. Unlike more authoritarian
socialist models, democratic socialism incorporates democratic processes, allowing
citizens to have a say in decision-making. While it retains the goal of reducing economic
inequalities and ensuring social justice, democratic socialism often incorporates free-
market principles for the production of goods and services. It seeks to reconcile
economic efficiency with a commitment to social welfare, workers' rights, and a fair
distribution of resources.
SLIDE 12
STATE AND CITIZENS RESPONSIBILITY
In John Rawls's political philosophy, the relationship between the state and its citizens is
defined by a set of principles aimed at achieving justice as fairness. The state has the
responsibility to ensure that the basic rights and liberties of all citizens are protected and
that social and economic inequalities benefit the least advantaged. Citizens, in turn,
have a responsibility to comply with the principles of justice, participate in the
democratic process, and contribute to the well-being of the society, fostering a
cooperative and just social order. Rawls envisions a social contract where both the state
and citizens uphold principles that promote fairness, equality, and the overall welfare of
the community.
SLIDE 13
TAXATION
In John Rawls's philosophy of justice as fairness, taxation is a mechanism through
which both the state and its citizens have their responsibilities. From the perspective of
the state, taxation is a means to finance public services and uphold the principles of
justice, including the Fair Equality of Opportunity and the Difference Principle. By
imposing charges on citizens and corporate entities, the state secures the necessary
resources to maintain infrastructure, provide education, and promote social welfare. On
the other side of this social contract, citizens have the responsibility to contribute to the
financial resources of the state through taxation. This obligation points out towards
Rawls's vision of a cooperative effort in creating a just and well-ordered society. By
fulfilling their tax obligations, citizens actively participate in supporting the principles of
justice, contributing to the common good, and ensuring the realization of a fair and
equitable social system. Ultimately, taxation, in Rawls's idea, points out the
interdependent relationship between the state and citizens, where both parties play a
role in fostering a society characterized by fairness, equality, and the betterment of all
its members.
SLIDE 14:
INCLUSIVE GROWTH
In John Rawls's philosophy of justice as fairness, the concept of inclusive growth
is an aspect of the mutual responsibilities held by the state and its citizens. The
state, according to Rawls, carries the responsibility of structuring societal
institutions and policies in a manner that prioritizes the welfare of the least
advantaged. Under economic growth, this equates to the state actively fostering
inclusive growth—economic progress that creates opportunities for all segments
of the population. Policies such as social safety, accessible education, and
regulations preventing undue economic disparities are seen as instruments to
fulfill this responsibility. On the citizens' side, a duty emerges to actively
participate in the economic and social life of the community, contributing to an
environment where the benefits of growth are distributed equitably. This involves
engagement in productive economic activities and advocacy for policies aligned
with the principles of justice.
