Whether or not utilitarianism provides a helpful method of moral decision-making
It is useful It is not useful
HC provides a clear method - W. D Ross - Impractical
Clear decision making structure which is The HC is impractical to apply to every
almost impossible to diverge from. This makes circumstance. For example, the ‘trolly problem’
all decisions fair and equal because the same would not give the agent sufficient time to
level of morality is applied to all cases. make all of these considerations.
‘To love is to value’ - Rand ‘Too many variables’ - Ross
Non Preferential - A. Macintyre and Hobbes -
The teleological approach and HC ensures Too optimistic of human nature
that there is no personal bias and that the The source of every crime, is some defect of the
decisions made align with our HN. This makes understanding; or some error in reasoning; or
all of the decisions unique and completely some sudden force of the passions -Hobbes
tailored to the preferences of the person.
Nature has placed mankind under the
governance of two sovereign masters, pain
and pleasure." - Bentham
Universal - A. Macintyre - Subjectivity
Non-religious and based on universal The concept of utility is not universal.
concepts. This makes it applicable to everyone For example, Gang rape would be considered
and by everyone. as serving utility which is obviously immoral.
‘Utilitarianism could justify horrendous acts as
being for the pleasure of the many’
Mill - Rule Ult H. Sidwick -
Acknowledges the complexity of society and The concept of Higher vs Lower pleasure is
successfully assesses the need to differentiate also subjective. It is unfair to suggest that the
between quality and quantity of the utility. This pleasures which we must all consider ‘higher’
makes it more helpful as it assists people in are music and literature as Bentham suggests.
choosing between quality and quantity. Henry Sidgwick ‘in practice it is hard to
‘each persons happiness is good to that distinguish between higher and lower
person, then the general happiness must be pleasures
god to the aggregate of all persons’
‘It is better to be a human dissatisfied than a Impractical -
pig satisfied’ Creating and remembering previous decisions
is not practical.
Singer - Preference Utl Briggs - Too broad
Acknowledges concepts of utility as subjective, The concept of preference remains too broad.
can have harmful consequences. Focus on if we understand utility broadly enough to
preferences makes decision easier. Helps include all potentially desirable ends, it is not
agent choose the preference of many rather clear that there is a clear way to make trade
than the want of the one. offs. - Briggs
‘our own preferences cannot count any more Supported by Alan Greenspan -
than the preferences of others’ - Singer Preference UTL is also too optimistic of HN.
’An infectious greed seemed to grip much of
Supported by R.M. Hare ‘equal preferences our business community’
count equally,whatever the content’.
Harm principle - W. D Ross - The outcome cannot be certain. The
The harm principle from Mill effectively only thing which can be certain is the intention,
resolved the issue of ill intent. therefore it is not helpful in making moral
‘the only purpose for which power can be decision making because there could be ill
rightfully exercised over any member of a intent therefore, if the intent is not pure then
, civilised community, against his will is to regardless of the outcome the action is
prevent harm to others’ immoral.
‘Too many variables’
However, Mill suggested otherwise
if it makes no difference in the act, makes none
in the morality' - Mill
It is useful It is not useful
HC provides a clear method - W. D Ross - Impractical
Clear decision making structure which is The HC is impractical to apply to every
almost impossible to diverge from. This makes circumstance. For example, the ‘trolly problem’
all decisions fair and equal because the same would not give the agent sufficient time to
level of morality is applied to all cases. make all of these considerations.
‘To love is to value’ - Rand ‘Too many variables’ - Ross
Non Preferential - A. Macintyre and Hobbes -
The teleological approach and HC ensures Too optimistic of human nature
that there is no personal bias and that the The source of every crime, is some defect of the
decisions made align with our HN. This makes understanding; or some error in reasoning; or
all of the decisions unique and completely some sudden force of the passions -Hobbes
tailored to the preferences of the person.
Nature has placed mankind under the
governance of two sovereign masters, pain
and pleasure." - Bentham
Universal - A. Macintyre - Subjectivity
Non-religious and based on universal The concept of utility is not universal.
concepts. This makes it applicable to everyone For example, Gang rape would be considered
and by everyone. as serving utility which is obviously immoral.
‘Utilitarianism could justify horrendous acts as
being for the pleasure of the many’
Mill - Rule Ult H. Sidwick -
Acknowledges the complexity of society and The concept of Higher vs Lower pleasure is
successfully assesses the need to differentiate also subjective. It is unfair to suggest that the
between quality and quantity of the utility. This pleasures which we must all consider ‘higher’
makes it more helpful as it assists people in are music and literature as Bentham suggests.
choosing between quality and quantity. Henry Sidgwick ‘in practice it is hard to
‘each persons happiness is good to that distinguish between higher and lower
person, then the general happiness must be pleasures
god to the aggregate of all persons’
‘It is better to be a human dissatisfied than a Impractical -
pig satisfied’ Creating and remembering previous decisions
is not practical.
Singer - Preference Utl Briggs - Too broad
Acknowledges concepts of utility as subjective, The concept of preference remains too broad.
can have harmful consequences. Focus on if we understand utility broadly enough to
preferences makes decision easier. Helps include all potentially desirable ends, it is not
agent choose the preference of many rather clear that there is a clear way to make trade
than the want of the one. offs. - Briggs
‘our own preferences cannot count any more Supported by Alan Greenspan -
than the preferences of others’ - Singer Preference UTL is also too optimistic of HN.
’An infectious greed seemed to grip much of
Supported by R.M. Hare ‘equal preferences our business community’
count equally,whatever the content’.
Harm principle - W. D Ross - The outcome cannot be certain. The
The harm principle from Mill effectively only thing which can be certain is the intention,
resolved the issue of ill intent. therefore it is not helpful in making moral
‘the only purpose for which power can be decision making because there could be ill
rightfully exercised over any member of a intent therefore, if the intent is not pure then
, civilised community, against his will is to regardless of the outcome the action is
prevent harm to others’ immoral.
‘Too many variables’
However, Mill suggested otherwise
if it makes no difference in the act, makes none
in the morality' - Mill
