Utilitarianism: A Flawed Ethical Theory
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that holds that the right action is the one that produces the greatest balance of benefits over harms for everyone affected. It is a consequentialist theory, meaning that it judges the rightness or wrongness of an action based on its consequences.
Key Facts
- Lack of Consideration for Justice: One of the main criticisms of utilitarianism is that it fails to take into account considerations of justice. Utilitarianism focuses solely on maximizing overall happiness or utility, which means that it may justify actions that are unjust or violate individual rights.
- Difficulty in Measuring and Comparing Values: Utilitarianism relies on assigning values to the benefits and harms resulting from actions and comparing them with alternative actions. However, it can be challenging to measure and compare the values of certain benefits and costs, such as the value of life, art, or human dignity. Additionally, accurately predicting all the consequences of an action is often uncertain.
- Potential for Unjust Actions: Utilitarianism may require individuals to commit unjust actions in certain situations. For example, it could justify punishing an innocent person if it leads to a greater overall happiness or utility. This conflicts with principles of justice and individual rights.
- Neglect of Other Moral Principles: Utilitarianism focuses primarily on consequences and the overall happiness produced by actions. However, morality encompasses more than just consequences. Other moral principles, virtues, and human rights should also be considered in ethical decision-making.
Utilitarianism has been criticized on several grounds. One of the main criticisms is that it fails to take into account considerations of justice. Utilitarianism focuses solely on maximizing overall happiness or utility, which means that it may justify actions that are unjust or violate individual rights.
For example, imagine that a doctor has two patients, one of whom is in great pain and the other of whom is in less pain. The doctor only has enough pain medication to give to one patient. According to utilitarianism, the doctor should give the medication to the patient who is in greater pain, even if that means that the other patient will continue to suffer. This is because giving the medication to the patient in greater pain will produce the greatest overall happiness.
However, many people would argue that this is an unjust decision. The patient in less pain also has a right to be free from pain, and the doctor should not be allowed to violate that right simply because doing so would produce greater overall happiness.
Another criticism of utilitarianism is that it is difficult to measure and compare the values of different benefits and harms. For example, how do you compare the value of saving a life to the value of preventing a minor inconvenience? Utilitarianism requires that we make these comparisons in order to determine the right action, but it provides no guidance on how to do so.
This can lead to arbitrary and inconsistent decisions. For example, one person might decide that saving a life is worth sacrificing a great deal of money, while another person might decide that it is not worth sacrificing anything at all.
Finally, utilitarianism neglects other moral principles. It focuses solely on consequences, but there are other important moral considerations, such as justice, fairness, and compassion. These considerations should also be taken into account when making ethical decisions.
In conclusion, utilitarianism is a flawed ethical theory. It fails to take into account considerations of justice, it is difficult to measure and compare the values of different benefits and harms, and it neglects other moral principles.
Citations
- Andre, C., & Velasquez, M. (1989). Calculating consequences: The utilitarian approach. Issues in Ethics, 2(1), 1-5.
- Austin, M. W. (2015, June 8). What’s wrong with utilitarianism? Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ethics-everyone/201506/whats-wrong-utilitarianism
- Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. (2014, August 1). Calculating consequences: The utilitarian approach. Retrieved from https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/calculating-consequences-the-utilitarian-approach/
FAQs
Doesn’t utilitarianism lead to the greatest happiness for the greatest number?
Yes, utilitarianism aims to maximize overall happiness or utility. However, it does not consider the distribution of happiness or the rights of individuals. It may justify actions that benefit the majority but harm a minority.
How can we measure and compare the value of different benefits and harms?
Utilitarianism requires us to weigh the benefits and harms of different actions to determine the right action. However, it provides no guidance on how to do this. Assigning values to different outcomes can be subjective and arbitrary, leading to inconsistent decisions.
Does utilitarianism ignore justice and fairness?
Yes, utilitarianism focuses solely on consequences and maximizing overall happiness. It does not take into account other important moral considerations, such as justice, fairness, and individual rights. This can lead to unjust or unfair outcomes.
Are there any other objections to utilitarianism?
In addition to the above, other objections to utilitarianism include:
- It can justify sacrificing the rights or well-being of individuals for the greater good.
- It can lead to decisions that are impractical or impossible to implement.
- It can be difficult to predict the long-term consequences of actions, which can lead to unintended negative outcomes.