Utilitarianism: Philosophy, Cases, and Controversies

Introduction

• Review of the Queen vs. Dudley and Stephens case (cannibalism at sea)
• Focus on Jeremy Bentham's utilitarian philosophy

Jeremy Bentham

• Born in England, 1748
• Attended Oxford at age 12 and law school at age 15
• Admitted to the bar at age 19 but did not practice law
• Devoted life to jurisprudence and moral philosophy

Bentham's Utilitarianism

• Key Principle: Maximize the general welfare, collective happiness, or overall balance of pleasure over pain (maximize utility).
• Reasoning: Pain and pleasure are sovereign masters; any moral system must maximize utility.
• Community and Legislation: The best policy maximizes happiness over suffering.
• Often implemented through cost-benefit analysis (assigning monetary value to costs and benefits).

Case Study: Smoking in the Czech Republic

• Philip Morris Study: Cost-benefit analysis of smoking
  • Negative effects: Increased healthcare costs
  • Positive effects: Tax revenues, savings on pensions and elderly housing
  • Net public finance gain: $147 million
  • Savings per premature death: Over $1200
• Controversy: Ethical concerns about placing dollar value on human life

Case Study: Ford Pinto

• Fuel tank design flaw causing explosions in rear collisions
• Cost-Benefit Analysis: Decided against adding safety shield
  • Cost per shield: $11
  • Total cost: $137 million
  • Benefits: $49.5 million
• Outcome: Public and jury backlash; ethical concerns about valuing human life

Cost-Benefit Analysis Debate

• Criticism: Placing monetary value on human life is unethical
  • Suffering and emotional losses are not adequately accounted for
• Defense: Necessary for making informed decisions
  • Companies need to balance costs to remain profitable
• Example: Cell phone use while driving study by Harvard
  • Balanced economic benefits against deaths from accidents

Utilitarianism and Minority Rights

• Criticism: Utilitarianism may not respect minority rights or individual preferences
• Responses:
  • Utilitarian defenders: Individual values are considered but must weigh against the majority’s.
• Example: Roman coliseum – ecstasy of the Romans vs. suffering of Christians

Alternative Views on Value Measurement

• Criticism: Values and preferences are not always commensurable
• Example: Thorndike's 1930s survey on unpleasant experiences
  • Varied monetary values assigned to different unpleasant experiences
  • Raises question about the adequacy of translating all values into a single measure

John Stuart Mill

• Context: Born 1806, raised under Benthamite principles, nervous breakdown at age 20
• Key Works: “On Liberty” and “Utilitarianism”
  • Affirmed utility as the basis for morality
  • Emphasized qualitative distinction between higher and lower pleasures
  • Advocated individual rights based on long-term social utility
• Mill’s Test: Higher pleasures are those preferred by those who experienced both

Experiment and Discussion

• Comparing experiences (Shakespeare, Fear Factor, Simpsons)
  • Most preferred Simpsons but acknowledged Shakespeare as higher value
• Mill’s Argument: Higher pleasures require education and cultivation
  • Endorsed qualitative distinction among pleasures
  • Emphasized long-term social benefits of justice and respecting rights

Conclusion

• Bentham’s Legacy: Literal adherence to philosophy in life and death (preserved body)
• Mill’s Contributions: Expanded utilitarian calculus to incorporate humanitarian concerns
• Debate Continues: Balancing utility, rights, and qualitative distinctions in values

Upcoming Discussion

• Exploration of non-utilitarian bases for rights
• Further examination of Mill's arguments and their implications