1.
MORALITY
AND
ETHICS
(cont.)

2.
Utilitarianism
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), English philosopher
A form of consequentialism
An act is judged to be moral or immoral according to its
consequences.
Instrumentalist good vs. Intrinsic good
Instrumentalist good: good as a means by which to realize
an intrinsic good, e.g. medicine
Intrinsic good: something good in and of itself, e.g.

3.
Utilitarianism (cont.)
Happiness and the absence of suffering are the
ultimate intrinsic goods.
The goal of morality is to maximize happiness (“the
greatest good for the greatest number”)
An act is good if it maximizes the collective
happiness and minimizes the collective suffering.

4.
Problems with Utilitarianism
Seemingly immoral acts can be judged moral, e.g.
killing an innocent person.
Consequences are often difficult or impossible to
predict.
The morality of an act may depend on chance (how
the consequences happen to play out).
How can you calculate units of goodness (utiles)?
Happiness and lack of suffering may not be the only
intrinsic goods.

5.
Varieties of Utilitarianism
Act utilitarianism
 classic utilitarianism
Preference utilitarianism
 aim to maximize the fulfillment of people’s preferences,
rather than happiness
Rule utilitarianism
 act in accordance with rules that, in the long run, tend
to maximize happiness/preferences

6.
Comparison of ethical systems
Main idea
Virtue ethics: We should cultivate the virtues and act in
accordance with them. Virtues include wisdom,
generosity, kindness, justice, pride, courage, honesty
Deontological ethics: follow strict moral laws, e.g. do
not murder, do not lie, do not steal
Utilitarian ethics: Act to maximize total happiness (and
lack of suffering) among all people

7.
Simplification of main idea (for discussion):
Virtue ethics: be good
Kantian ethics: do what’s right
Utilitarianian ethics: do what will have good
consequences

8.
Justification:
Virtue ethics: Man’s natural function (telos) as a
rational animal
Kantian ethics: universalizability of moral laws
Utilitarianism: Pleasure is good, pain is bad

9.
Principles:
Virtue ethics: be a good (well-
balanced/rational) person
Kantian ethics: Always treat a person as an
end, not just an means
Utilitarianism: Promote the greatest good for
the greatest number

10.
Ultimate goal:
Virtue ethics: eudemonia (the good life)
Kantian ethics: uphold the worth and dignity of
every person
Utilitarian ethics: maximize happiness

11.
 Main practical problems:
 Virtue ethics: vague
 Kantian ethics: rigid
 Utilitarianism: may justify seemingly wrong
actions

12.
Thought experiments
Philosophers love thought
experiments!
Test consistency of beliefs.

13.
e.g. Kid breaks a vase
Should he lie to his Mom?
What’s
the harm?
Ethical thought experiments
A way to compare different ethical systems.
Which ethical system is consistent with our
pre-theoretical beliefs?

14.
 A terrorist has secretly planted a bomb on Mr.
G, and Mr. G. is now (innocently) walking into
a crowded theatre. The bomb will be
detonated in 5 minutes, killing hundreds. You
are too far away to stop Mr. G, but you can
shoot him down, killing him and saving
hundreds. Should you?

15.
Trolley case
A runaway train is about to hit 5 people on
Track A. Should you throw a switch to make
the train go down Track B, where one
person is standing (and will be hit).
A runaway train is about to hit 5 people
standing on the track. Should you push a fat
man in front of the train?

16.
Transplant case
Kill one innocent bystander
and transplant his organs to
five patients to save their
lives

17.
Suggested readings
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, at:
http://plato.stanford.edu/
Entries on: Consequentialism and Deontological Ethics and
Virtue Ethics
 Mill, John Stuart, Utilitarianism (1863), available at:
www.utilitarianism.com/mill1.htm
Required Reading
 Stephen Law, The Philosophy Gym, Chapter 17, “Killing Mary to
Save Jodie”
 (in ummoodle)

18.
Quiz next week
 You will be asked about a moral dilemma and
expected to discuss it in relation to one or more
moral ethical systems.