You need only keep her bound and gagged in the cellar and force her to sign the checks. For example, a Consequentialist who thinks the kind of consequence that matters is happiness is unlikely to think that one persons happiness is more important than anothers (so long as the amounts of happiness in question are the same). One worry about these arguments is that if it happens that the most efficient way for you to help people is to send as much money as possible to help desperately poor people you do not know, then your following consequentialism may involve thinking of the people you know mainly as potential sources of money. Consequentialism states that an actions moral value is determined by its consequences. Act consequentialism is a moral theory that tells us the morally right action is always the one that will produce the best overall outcome in the world. That this evaluation should focus on the overall good for society as a whole rather than on individual gains or losses. 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. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. . following which will have the best consequences are the same as the non-consequentialist rules most of us apply in everyday life and in judging the hypothetical cases. If every action is taken to produce some benefit, that shows only that the benefit is part of the reason for every action, not that the benefit is the whole reason. Even though a whole set of consequences has no further consequences, it might have further implications. The utilitarianism of John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham is a well known example of consequentialism. An example of act utilitarianism is a pharmaceutical company releasing a drug that has been governmentally approved with known side effects because the drug is able to help more people than are bothered by the minor side effects. Is that point an objection to consequentialism? 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. It has a moral sense and an objective sense. One possible reply to this argument against consequentialism is that even if good overall consequences turns out to be meaningless, one might still think, for example, that the right action is the one that causes the most happiness. Any one of these collections provides an excellent introduction to consequentialism. If people can get where they are going more quickly, they will probably use the time they saved to do things that will add happiness to their lives or the lives of others. Another important point about consequences is that the actual consequences of an action, beyond the action itself, need not be actual outcomes. [2] 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 Consequentialist Perspective. In, Railton, Peter. (For more discussion of consequentialism, see the consequentialism section of the article Ethics.). All utilitarian theories share four key elements: consequentialism, welfarism, impartiality, and aggregationism. Therefore, an action is rationally justifiable insofar as it does good overall. To see how someone might question that, think about skills and skill. (2022). In addition, the fine journal Utilitas is entirely devoted to the topic. Simply, consequentialism means that the moral worth of an action is determined by the result it produces rather than by any predetermined principles of morality. Moral Philosophy studies what is right and wrong, and related philosophical issues. Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that suggests that the best actions are those that maximize utility. Learn more about our academic and editorial standards. These variations are themselves derived in the same way as the general rules. Having life is something that provides value to people. But Expectable Consequentialism has a strange implication. A second worry is that premise (1) may not support statement (2). Arguably it was not. First, abstractly, to be moral is to do ones rational best to do what is objectively right. Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that determines right from wrong by focusing on outcomes. This says that the ethically right choice in a given situation is the one that produces the most happiness and the least unhappiness for the largest number of people. The more happiness there is, the better. For another example, suppose I am sick and you are a doctor. A more general reply to the claim that consequentialism advises us to meddle in other peoples business is that even where secrecy would not be involved, there are Consequentialist reasons for you to avoid direct meddling with others private spheres and personal affairs. while it sounds attractive in theory, its a very difficult system to apply to real life moral decisions because: every moral decision is a completely separate case that must be fully evaluated, individuals must research the consequences of their acts before they can make an ethically sound choice, doing such research is often impracticable, and too costly, the time taken by such research leads to slow decision-making which may itself have bad consequences, and the bad consequences of delay may outweigh the good consequences of making a perfect decision, but where a very serious moral choice has to be made, or in unusual circumstances, individuals may well think hard about the consequences of particular moral choices in this way, some people argue that if everyone adopted act consequentialism it would have bad consequences for society in general, this is because it would be difficult to predict the moral decisions that other people would make, and this would lead to great uncertainty about how they would behave, some philosophers also think that it would lead to a collapse of mutual trust in society, as many would fear that prejudice or bias towards family or other groups would more strongly influence moral decisions than if people used general moral rules based on consequentialism, fortunately the impracticality of act consequentialism as a general moral process means we don't have to worry much about this, Whether acts are good or bad depends on moral rules, Moral rules are chosen solely on the basis of their consequences, an act is right if and only if it results from the internalisation of a set of rules that would maximize good if the overwhelming majority of agents internalised this set of rules, Rule consequentialism gets round the practical problems of act consequentialism because the hard work has been done in deriving the rules; individuals don't generally have to carry out difficult research before they can take action, And because individuals can shortcut their moral decision-making they are much more likely to make decisions in a quick and timely way, Because rule consequentialism uses general rules it doesn't always produce the best result in individual cases, However, those in favour of it argue that it produces more good results considered over a long period than act consequentialism, One way of dealing with this problem - and one that people use all the time in everyday life - is to apply basic rules, together with a set of variations that cover a wide range of situations. See Brandt (1979); Hooker et al (2000). Consequentialism is based on two principles: It gives us this guidance when faced with a moral dilemma: And it gives this general guidance on how to live: Different forms of consequentialism differ over what the good thing is that should be maximised. Rule consequentialism holds that rules should be written regarding their likely outcomes, not necessarily on their inherent good or bad nature. 1. "You are not acting your age." "That was unprofessional behavior.". (2021). Back to Series
(Premise), The right action is whatever would promote the greatest possible balance of satisfaction of the desires of all people. (From 1), What will satisfy each persons desire is her own happinessand whatever promotes that. Look at any of the standard anti-consequentialist philosophical examples - trolley car, organ bank, . However, once one introduces such a complex standard of goodness for consequences, questions arise as to how to rate the relative importance of the parts of the standard and about how such a view can be given theoretical elegance. Hence in the context of consequentialism, perhaps actions should normally be understood to mean intentional actions.) Suppose I will bake a cake if you win a coin toss, and you are now deciding whether to toss the coin or just walk away. For if we can minimize the total amount of meddling in the long run by meddling today (perhaps by spying on terrorism suspects or by privately bombing the citizens of aggressive countries), this new theory tells us to do so. In consequentialism, the consequences of an action include (a) the action itself, and (b) everything the action causes. I simply assume that this group fights tuberculosis, and I do not look at the pamphlet because I do not care. For another thing, suppose this amazing being does lack all other concerns. Expectable Consequentialism says that an action can be right even if I do not think reasonably about it at all, so long as it is the action I would have estimated to have the best consequences if I had done a reasonable job of making an estimate. Consequentialism does not itself say what kinds of consequences are good. Behavioral and Brain Sciences Some examples of nonconsequentialist decisions Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 February 2010 Gerald M. Phillips Article Metrics Save PDF Cite Rights & Permissions Abstract An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Cognitive film and media ethics. it's hard to predict the future consequences of an act, in almost every case the most we can do is predict the probability of certain consequences following an act. For example, Ralph Wedgwood suggests we picture the rational probability . The remaining arguments for consequentialism given here, like the argument from love, do not speak merely of good consequences overall. Rather they defend consequentialism by defending the importance of some particular kind of consequence, such as happiness, the satisfaction of desire, or the well-being of people. C4.P18 However, at times, these . So, for example, according to rule consequentialism we consider lying to be wrong because we know that in general lying produces bad consequences. It is in the spirit of consequentialism to look at goodness ultimately from an impartial, impersonal point of view. Hedonism, on the other hand, says something is good if the consequence produces pleasure or avoids pain. A normative theory in moral philosophy, it became prominent after being put forth by the renowned philosopher, Immanuel Kant, in 1788. Telephone services were more or less global by the early 20th century. These values may not necessarily result in the best overall outcome. Consequentialist theories don't pay direct attention to whether an act is carried out with good or bad intentions; most people think these are highly relevant to moral judgements. 7. Many ethical issues are of this sort. (From 1 and 2), An action is good insofar as its consequences include the satisfaction of desire. If the outcome is good, how one achieved the outcome is not that important. As mentioned above, in consequentialism the consequences of an action are everything the action brings about, including the action itself. While there are many varieties of consequentialism, their common thread is that, as the name suggests, normative evaluation of particular actions or rules depends on an analysis of consequences alone. According to Fiet (2022), consequentialism: is a philosophical approach, one of a class of normative, teleological ethical theories, which posits that the consequences of ones conduct are the ultimate basis for judging it, either its rightness or wrongness (p. 225). For example, it's a bad thing for a man to rape and beat a woman (regardless of consequences), but it's even worse if as a result of the brutality, her unborn daughter is killed and the rape victim who survives gets AIDS. On consequentialist grounds, actions and inactions whose negative consequences outweigh the positive consequences will be deemed morally wrong while actions and inactions whose positive . Or suppose the recommendation that comes from you friend, your mother, your heart, or your prior resolution, reflects insight into the implications of your action that would not be reflected in the conscious estimates of consequences you might be able to work up on the spur of the moment. For the moment, Jill was an authority for Jack on whether these lumps were gold. The history of utilitarianism. A billionaire needs an organ transplant. For instance, consequentialist theories are often cited when discussing the morality of euthanasia, capital punishment, and animal testing. So looking for a range of 'realistic' - real life, true to life, matter of fact, everyday, &c. - situations to which it applies misses its totally general applicability. While it may violate certain international humanitarian laws due to immediate risks associated with these activities (rule level), they ultimately benefit humanity if peace can be brought about (state level). But if I desire something slightly and then intensely, which counts? Suppose you are on average just as happy as I am, but you live twice as long. For example, suppose God, who knows all the consequences, has announced that certain kinds of things are right. Consequentialism is a theory of normative ethics that states that an actions value is determined by its consequences.
2022 Gmc Terrain Block Heater Location,
David Scaife Car Collection,
Haywood County Tn Schools Superintendent,
Percy Jackson Turns Into A Goddess Fanfiction,
1911 Last Round Failure Feed,
Articles C