Ethics Script: Consequentialism & Utilitarianism slide 2 {Introduction to the Theory of Consequentialism}

There are two basic principles within the theory of consequentialism: (1) an action’s ethicality depends only on the results of that action, and (2) the more “good” (and less harmful) results an action produces, the better (or more right) the act is. You already know the basic idea behind this concept as “the end justifies the means.” slide 3 {How it Works… and Doesn’t Work} While actions tend to be brief and immediate, the consequences of those actions can have long-term—even permanent—effects. A consequentialist would expect that you (and everyone else) consider the implications of your actions in terms of a “good” or “right” outcome.

Consequentialism itself doesn’t define which consequences are “good.” It’s up to you to decide what is right and wrong on a personal basis. Two consequentialists can look at the same choice and completely disagree on the action that should be taken… like in the case of an assisted suicide or how to deal with a pandemic. But they are more likely to agree on what kind of action should be taken in order to help a lost child so some actions are easier to agree on than others. slide 4 {Utilitarianism a Model of Consequentialism and Introduction to Mr. Bentham}

The most popular consequentialist model, Utilitarianism, accounts for ambiguities that consequentialism alone does not. Utilitarianism emerged in the early 19th century with British philosopher and “hedonist” Jeremy Bentham, who aimed to assess whether or not Parliament was passing fair and ethical laws at the time.

According to Bentham, actions should always deliver the “greatest good for the greatest number” of creatures. Bentham even used the term “creatures” inclusively--because animals can feel pleasure and pain, they should also be considered and not mistreated unnecessarily.

1 of 3 Ethics: Consequentialism-Utilitarianism

Slide 5 {Hedonistic Calculus}

In order to determine the “greatest good,” Bentham created the hedonistic calculus. Think of it as a kind of cost/benefit analysis aiming for you to put yourself in another’s position. The hedonistic calculus quantitatively identifies and measures pain and pleasure.

Although Bentham’s utilitarianism seems logical at first glance, there are several flaws that become apparent when the theory is put into play. Most significantly, Bentham’s theory only measures pleasures in terms of quantity, not in terms of quality. slide 6 {Utilitarianism accounting for Quality and Introduction to Mr. Mills}

This is where Bentham’s protégé, John Stuart Mills, comes in. In Mills’ utilitarian thought, not all pleasures are equal and certain pleasures bear more value than others. Mills argued that quality of a pleasure be considered as well as quantity, as a small amount of high quality pleasure should outweigh a much larger amount of low-quality pleasure. slide 7 {Different values of Pleasure and Pain}

Determining quality relies on judgment and intuition, which are somewhat subjective (though not arbitrary). Most people would agree that getting a reward for something they worked hard on results in higher pleasure than the pleasure of getting a reward for participating; likewise, it results in significantly higher pleasure than getting a reward after cheating. As for pain and punishment, being punished for something you knew was wrong is not as painful as being punished for something you didn’t do.

slide 8 {Things to Remember}

To recap: consequentialism is result-oriented. A consequentialist defends their ethical choices based on their results: ultimately, the “ends justify the means.” They seek to find the greatest pleasure and the lowest pain. Utilitarianism is a popular model for Consequentialism. Bentham’s hedonistic calculus helps you quantitatively measure the “greatest good” and Mills accounts for the qualitative aspect of “good,” giving you the action with the best long-term outcome.

2 of 3 Ethics: Consequentialism-Utilitarianism