The Utilitarian Perspective
January 20, 2023
Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, one of the three (most think there are three) main forms of ethical theory. Consequentialism holds that an action's morality is based solely on said action's consequences. Utilitarianism is a specific type of consequentialism that has three main aspects. First: the aspect of consequentialism as defined above. Second: The hedonist view that pleasure/happiness is the only thing of intrinsic value. Third: impartiality, the view that no one person’s (or in some cases animals) happiness is greater than another's. When combined these aspects form the governing principles of the utilitarian: a moral action aims to maximize the total amount of happiness and minimize suffering. This is the dogma of the utilitarian, and I am sure you have heard it before.
Utilitarianism is absolutely appealing at first glance. The most happiness for the most people, how could that possibly have downsides? It seems like an intuitive and logical method to determine the morality of an action. I would not be the first to criticize utilitarianism, and I certainly will not be the last, but nonetheless, I will. The first issue I, and many others, have with utilitarianism is incredibly demanding. If you are to be a true utilitarian you must meticulously analyze the consequences of every action taken. The theory requires you to make the best choice, it leaves no room for actions that are just permissible. Surely there is nothing wrong with me spending four dollars to buy a cup of coffee, yet in the utilitarians’ view, those four dollars could have been donated to a starving child. In fact, Peter Singer, a quite prolific utilitarian, claims that this seemingly absurd view is not only a moral obligation but also an effective solution to world poverty. He claims that everything beyond the essentials to live should be donated to those who need it most. He does his best to live by his philosophy, but to most, it seems far too demanding. In short, utilitarianism is a morality only for saints.
Another issue with moral theory is the concept of impartiality. Utilitarianism requires us to care for every person's happiness and suffering equally. Say I give you 100 dollars and say you may either treat your mother or a convicted murderer to dinner. There is a strong utilitarian argument that the reliving of the criminals suffering for a knight is more significant than another meal with your mom. To most, this does not seem like a situation where we have a moral obligation to treat the criminal. Likewise, imagine the classic trolley problem. A train is rushing down the track and will run over five convicted murderers, but you have the ability to switch the track to kill one innocent instead. The utilitarian cannot prefer the suffering of one individual over another, so they simply do the math. Because 1 death is less than 5 deaths the utilitarian will kill the innocent.
Utilitarianism is not a very highly regarded moral theory among philosophers, but it does have its proponents. This has been a very brief overview of some of the drawbacks, but there are certain scenarios where it seems utilitarianism is the logical and correct methodology to follow.