Consequentialism: The Consequences of an Act Make It Right or Wrong

...

The hedonist will insist that the source of value lies in the mental state rather than outcomes in the world. The mental state is an outcome, but it is an internal outcome.

Are pleasant experiences all that matter?

Exercise: Robert Nozick’s Exercise Machine.

The Standard Criticisms of Utilitarianism:

- The Argument from Deontological Restrictions:

It is wrong to treat people as a means to others ends (even if those ends are reasonable and urgent).

Examples:

- The redistribution of body parts from the hobo who wanders into the emergency ward at the right time to save five people.

- Trolley Car problems.

- Kill 1, save 19.

Rule Utilitarianism:

Rule - Utilitarianism determines the rightness of an act indirectly. First, the best rule of conduct is found. This is done by finding the value of the consequences of following a particular rule. The rule the following of which has the best overall consequences is the best rule.

Rule utilitarians claim that actions are right if and only if they conform to rules that are expected to maximize utility.

Standard Rule Utilitarianism is unpopular now because it involves “rule worship”.

Reply on behalf of RU: Well-formulated rules will contain numerous exception clauses.

Objection to Reply: RU collapses in AU

The worry is that RU will then be no different from AU. This is because a sensible person will appeal to exceptions whenever following the rule will entail departures from the best consequences.

Group Assignment # 2: Watch Episode 2, part 1, in Sandel’s Harvard lectures on Moral Philosophy. Access the episode via the following link: http://www.justiceharvard.org/watch/

Do you think that the cost/benefit analysis in Ford Pinto case deviates from a properly conducted utilitarian calculation? Yes/ No? If yes, in what way, if not, what problems with act utilitarianism this case illustrates?