Ethics

Ethics Study Guide that Bentham judges pleasures only in terms of his seven factors; Mill, however, thinks some kinds of happiness were innately greater than others, as was shown by people favoring one over the other. In his work On Liberty , Mill defended Bentham and Utilitarianism. Mill did not want society to live under a contract, but he acknowledged that people in a society should be grateful for the protection that is given, and therefore certain conduct is expected. He was a staunch proponent of individual rights. He believed that people should avoid harm to others as they go about their business. If one takes an action that harms others, then society should take control of the situation. This is called the Harm Principle , which for Mill is the only justification for the limitation of liberty. Mill did not support selfish indifference. Mill also argued that free speech is crucial to the greatest happiness for the greatest number. He thought that restricting free speech prevented knowledge, and that happiness can only be achieved through knowledge. Free speech was necessary to promote knowledge and learning. Utilitarian justifications are forward-looking (consequentialistic) in nature. All the questions about the justification of punishment (general justification, title, and severity) will be answered by appeal to the utility (value) of the consequences of an action. All punishment is, according to the utilitarian, intrinsically bad. This is because it involves the infliction of pain, or some other consequence normally considered unpleasant. Thus a system of punishment is justified only by its consequences. Systems of punishment are usually claimed to reduce crime by three means: deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation. One must also evaluate punishment on utilitarian grounds by asking certain questions about effectiveness and rationale. The main criticism of utilitarianism is the argument that there is more to ethics than happiness, and that, regardless of the consequences, some things are just right or wrong. Since consequentialism determines moral rightness solely based on the consequences, it denies the influence of circumstances or the intrinsic nature of the act or anything that happens before the act. Another criticism of utilitarianism is how to determine what will make people happy. In order to apply utilitarian theory to real world situations one would need to know the exact outcome of any action, how it would affect every person involved, and what “happiness” means to each. 3.5 Subtypes of Utilitarianism Act utilitarianism states moral actions are the ones that will produce the most utility in the situation. The value of an action is not determined by law; an action is moral when it benefits the most people. Examples of act utilitarianism are specific actions. Not killing a specific person will prevent sadness for that person's family. Opening the door for the person carrying a box will make that person happy. In some situations, the pain and pleasure are weighed out for the greatest utility in direct calculations. For example five people are shipwrecked with no food. If they kill and eat one person, four people have a chance to survive (happiness), but one will die (pain). If they do not take this action, all five will die (pain). The act that has the greatest utility, then, is for one person to die, because that choice ©2018 Achieve Page 23 of 116