Page 2: Modern Utilitarianism and Ethical Dilemmas
This page explores more recent developments in utilitarian thought and addresses some of the key challenges and criticisms faced by the theory.
Louis Pojman proposes a multilevel approach to utilitarianism, suggesting the use of rules of thumb that generally maximize utility. This approach aims to make utilitarianism more practical and realistic in everyday decision-making.
Vocabulary: Multilevel utilitarianism is an approach that combines elements of both act and rule utilitarianism, using general rules while allowing for flexibility in specific situations.
Peter Singer's preference utilitarianism shifts the focus from pleasure to the satisfaction of preferences. This version of utilitarianism requires weighing up the interests of all those involved or impacted by an action, including animals, as sentient beings also have preferences.
Definition: Preference utilitarianism is a form of utilitarianism that defines the good to be maximized as the satisfaction of preferences rather than pleasure or happiness.
Critics argue that utilitarianism can lead to counterintuitive or morally problematic outcomes. Bernard Williams contends that utilitarianism can violate our moral integrity by encouraging us to perform actions we would otherwise find repulsive.
Example: Williams presents the case of Jim, who is invited to kill one innocent person to save nineteen others, illustrating how utilitarianism might require actions that conflict with our moral intuitions.
The trolley dilemma, popularized by Philippa Foot, highlights the difficulties in applying utilitarian calculations to complex moral situations. This thought experiment reveals the subjective nature of utilitarian decision-making and its potential limitations in real-world scenarios.
Highlight: The trolley dilemma demonstrates the challenges of applying utilitarian principles consistently across different scenarios, revealing potential inconsistencies in moral intuitions.
Critics also argue that utilitarianism places unrealistic demands on individuals, requiring them to be "superhumans" who constantly calculate the consequences of their actions and potentially neglect personal relationships in favor of maximizing overall utility.
Quote: "The theory requires us to be superhumans, who forego the requirements of personal relationships." - This criticism highlights the potential conflict between utilitarian demands and the realities of human psychology and social bonds.
