Hooker, B. Welfarism: The view that only the welfare or well-being of individuals determines the value of an outcome. So also are community religious leaders, community doctors, bakers, shoe-sales people, and the like. (From 1 and 2), An action is good insofar as its consequences include the satisfaction of desire. He says that if he is given the next suitable organ he will fund 1000 hip-replacements a year for 10 years. If only permanent things mattered, then your happiness and misery in this life would not matter at all; but surely they do matter. The defender of Reasonable or Dual Consequentialism might argue that the objection has misunderstood what it is to have a reasonable estimate of an actions consequences. London: Edward Elgar Publishing. First published Tue May 20, 2003; substantive revision Mon Jun 3, 2019. We need to see ourselves clearly in order to do good effectively in the long run. So consequentialism is correct. Campbell, Richmond, and Sowden, Lanning, eds. Finally, some argue that consequentialism fails to consider certain values, such as justice or fairness when determining the morality of an action (Stubbs, 1981). After a chapter or two I started to realize all of the similarities between my life as a high school student and Melinda's in Speak. In assessing the consequences of actions, utilitarianism relies upon some theory of intrinsic value: something is held to be good in itself, apart from further consequences, and all other values are believed to derive their worth from their relation to this intrinsic good as a means to an end. For example, introducing a minimum wage law could potentially increase economic growth while reducing poverty levels if it is successful thus making it an effective policy from a state-consequentialist point of view. Communication. people don't agree on what should be assessed in calculating good consequences. But consequentialism is still controversial. Although the majority of people would benefit from this idea, most would never agree to it. An example of ethical egoism would be a person who owes money to a friend and decides to pay the friend back not because that person owes money, but because it is in his best interest to pay his friend back so that he does not lose his friend. To see how someone might question that, think about skills and skill. This historically important and still popular theory embodies the basic intuition that what is best or right is whatever makes the world best . It is unclear, then, whether the standard to which we should hold theories of morality is that they must explain why morality is easy to know about or why morality is terribly hard to know about! Such a conception is egalitarian in the sense that it counts every bit of your happiness as being just as important as the same sized bits of my happiness. This makes life nicer and helps people be concerned for each other rather than fearful of each other, and they will therefore do more good for each other. These variations are themselves derived in the same way as the general rules. One reason is that, in general, external goods tend to produce more happiness or well-being when they go to people who have less of these goods than when they go to people who have more. Researchers identify many criticisms of consequentialism, such as its lack of consideration for individual rights, reliance on calculation and prediction, and failure to consider certain values, such as justice or fairness. So if consequentialism agrees with common sense, that agreement is some reason to think that consequentialism is true. In practice people don't assess the ethical consequences of every single act (that's called 'act consequentialism') because they don't have the time. Should it count if it is based on a factual mistake or if it is malicious? Cite this Article in your Essay (APA Style), Privacy PolicyTerms and ConditionsDisclaimerAccessibility StatementVideo Transcripts. For example, it can be formulated in terms of the good that actually results from rules or in terms of the rationally expected good of the consequences of rules . See Singer (1972); Jackson (1991); Kidder (2003). Viktoriya is passionate about researching the latest trends in economics and business. The history of utilitarianism. It was reasonable for him to rely on her imperfect judgment, even though neither of them knew quite what gold is. Actions that promote egalitarian institutions, then, would tend to do the most good overall. Dual Consequentialism can say both of those things. Pleasures pass by as quickly as actions. However, in letting the missile launch, thousands of people will die. One could produce more overall happiness in the world by doing charity work tomorrow than by watching television all day tomorrow. It's hard to measure and compare the 'goodness' of those consequences. The reasonable way to estimate consequences would involve at least glancing through the pamphlet, but I am not interested. Such a situation has been seen in cases where governments have implemented policies with negative consequences for some people to benefit society. In short, utilitarianism is consequentialist and welfarist. One worry about this shorter argument is that Premise 2 may be false. In consequentialism, the consequences of an action include (a) the action itself, and (b) everything the action causes. 3. Here are two simple examples of such theories: Egoistic Consequentialism: Of all the things a person might do at any given moment, the morally right action is the one that has the best consequences for that person. But if I desire something slightly and then intensely, which counts? So if your action does vastly more good than what most other people would do in similar circumstances, but you could have chosen an action that would have done even a little more, Plain Consequentialism says that what you did was morally wrong. Further, those near to you are counting on your help, so that if you stop helping them their plans will be disrupted, while strangers will not be hurt in that way if you do not spend money on them. But one could object that in another sense, such a conception is not egalitarian because it does not care whether happiness is distributed equally or unequally among people. The most famous version of this theory is utilitarianism. See Sen (1982), Nagel (1986), Scheffler (1994), Bennett (1989), Scheffler (1989), Brink (1986), and Skorupski (1995). You need only keep her bound and gagged in the cellar and force her to sign the checks. The criticisms of consequentialism raise a number of fundamental questions that are important in ascertaining the relationship with criminal law and justice practice. One key theory is consequentialism, which says that an individual's correct moral response is related to the outcome/ consequence of the act and not its intentions/ motives. Suppose someone from Tuberculosis Aid comes to my door, says only, Would you give to Tuberculosis Aid? and hands me a pamphlet, which explains their evil plans on page 2. Email: hainesw@hkucc.hku.hk https://www.jstor.org/stable/3750884. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40926832. Stubbs, A. This point can be expressed by saying that there is a 50% epistemic probability of heads, or that the reasonably expectable consequences of pushing the Toss button include a 50% epistemic chance of heads. Not every version of consequentialism is anthropocentric, and as several contributors point out, some or all of the often very strong claims defended by non-anthropocentric thinkers can be expressed in a consequentialist framework. RULE CONSEQUENTIALISM: "An act is wrong if and only if it is forbidden by the code of rules whose internalization by the overwhelming majority of everyone everywhere in each new generation[*] has maximum expected value in terms of wellbeing (with some priority for the worst off). Ideal code, real world: A rule-consequentialist theory of morality. Now, suppose that you do not happen to know whether this machine always yields heads or always tails. Most of the best recent work on consequentialism is collected in the following anthologies. If the greatest total can be created only by exploiting the miserable to make the happy even happier, then such consequentialism would seem to say that you should do it. The term 'deontology' originates from the Greek words of 'deon', meaning duty, and 'logos', meaning science or the study of. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Reasonable estimates of consequences seem to involve a different kind of probability from that discussed in 1.b above. Criminal Justice Ethics,36(2), 183204. If the evil group was so cleverly deceptive that even the Better Business Bureaus web site said they do good work fighting malaria, then you may think the damage done by my money was not my fault. But you might think that whether my action was morally wrong depends on what consequences it would have been reasonable for me to expect, not on the actual consequences. The utilitarianism of John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham is a well known example of consequentialism. Reasonable Consequentialism says that for an action of mine to be right, I must actually come to a reasonable conclusion beforehand about the consequences. What is morality? Consequentialism is, as we have seen, one of many different proposed answers to that question. See Le Guin (1973); Rawls (1999); Harsanyi (1977). The Schizophrenia of Modern Ethical Theories., Taurek, John. Here is a brief overview of the main forms of consequentialism: Utilitarianism is a type of consequentialism that states that an action should be judged based on its ability to maximize happiness for most people. For example, if you think that the whole point of morality is (a) to spread happiness and relieve suffering, or (b) to create as much freedom as possible in the world, or (c) to promote the survival of our species, then you accept consequentialism. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Utilitarianism suggests that the only item of intrinsic worth is happiness, but there are also other commodities that are worth considering. So far as you can tell, heads and tails are equally likely, even if objectively there is a 100% chance of heads. Plain Scalar Consequentialism: Of any two things a person might do at any given moment, one is better than another to the extent that its overall consequences are better than the others overall consequences. China, Expectable Consequentialism and Reasonable Consequentialism, Two Simple Arguments for Consequentialism, It is Wrong to Choose the Worse Over the Better, The whole of an actions consequences has no further consequences. Although the next chapter was intriguing and urged me to read on. According to Rule Consequentialism, the right thing for each person in the community near the river to do is to follow the rule, Throw garbage in the dump, not in the river. Even if nobody else is going to the dump, and your going to the dump causes only inconvenience and no benefit, Rule Consequentialism says to take your garbage to the dump because that is what the best set of community rules would require. Giving Voice To Values View All Eight short . Now, this objection does not directly apply to Plain Consequentialism or Plain Scalar Consequentialism, for these theories do not say that we should think about consequences. According to act utilitarianism, then, the right thing to do tomorrow is to go out and do charity work; it is wrong to stay home and watch television all day. Deontology and the Agent: A Reply to Bennett. But when you are deciding whom to spend your money on, common sense seems to hold that you are normally morally permitted to favor yourself over strangers and often morally required to favor your children over strangers. Further, it is important that people be free to make decisions for themselves, even poor decisions, because that is the only way that people develop strength of character and because constant experimentation is the only way humanity learns about the various possibilities of life. Consequentialism is an ethical theory that judges an actions moral correctness by its consequences. In other words, one must ask whether the action promotes benefit overall. Another reply to the extreme examples is to point out that although they rely on secrecy, they overlook secrecys consequential drawbacks. Plain Consequentialism is a theory about which actions are right. Double Consequentialism says his choice is morally right, even though his decision was not based on estimates of consequences and went against his estimates. Its standard is high. It is argued that consequentialism relies heavily on calculation and prediction, which can be time-consuming and difficult. Consequentialism can be broken down into two core beliefs: Today, consequentialism has many different forms from utilitarianism to rule consequentialism and has been applied in various contexts, from business decisions to criminal justice. Two-level consequentialism combines elements from both rule and state consequentialist theories. Thus it would seem that the standards of goodness vary with the kind of thing we are talking about. Other versions of consequentialism may be generated by making small changes in this theory, as we shall see, so long as the new theory stays faithful to the broad idea that morality is all about producing the right kinds of overall consequences. Parental support is an important element in overweight prevention programs for children. It teaches: Rule consequentialism bases moral rules on their consequences. Sen, Amartya, and Williams, Bernard, eds. (2010). And even people who do not believe in a life after death often give their lives for larger causes. Today, consequentialism has many different forms developed over the years. Classical utilitarianism includes two further elements: hedonism and totalism. This course of action is justified only if their actions can be proven to be a threat to society, regardless of their intentions or potential benefits. Results-based ethics produces this important conclusion for ethical thinking: This far-fetched example may make things clearer: The classic form of results-based ethics is called utilitarianism. For example, if eating a certain food will bring an individual pleasure but harm others, it is considered moral according to this theory. Foot (1967). Hence the reasonable expectation is that embezzling your grandmothers checks would have terrible consequences. Another worry is that it is unclear exactly how 7 is supposed to imply 8. Another worry is that it is obscure whether there is anything sensible that might be meant by a greater or lesser amount of satisfaction of desire. Are all desires to count or only those that exist at the time of the action or the decision (even if they disappear before most of the consequences arrive)? If there is such an authority, then actions one chooses by deferring to the authority may be morally right according to Double Consequentialism even if they are morally wrong according to Dual Consequentialism. We turn now to some of the most popular reasons to think consequentialism is false and some possible replies to these attacks. Or suppose a societys conventional views about what is right and wrong reflect centuries of experience about what tends to cause trouble. Now, one reply to the extreme examples is that such opportunities are extremely unusual.
Long Dog Challenge Record,
George Peppard Children,
Stanford Energy Fellowship,
During Mummification A Dead Pharaohs Eyes Were Replaced With 6,
Articles C