Teleological Ethics: Morality is determined by the consequences of actions

Hedonism: value (good) is pleasure/happiness Egoism: my happiness is the greatest good Utilitarianism: the good is the greatest

amount of happiness for the greatest number of people (or perhaps sentient beings)

Morality is a means to an end: to know what we ought to do, we must first know what is valuable

Consequentialist Ethical Theories Egoism: the good is whatever promotes my

long-term interests Hedonism: the good is pleasure

Pursue pleasures not mixed with pain (beauty, prudence, honor, justice, courage, knowledge); satisfy natural desires (food, sleep), avoid vain desires (fame, fashion)

Self-realization: develop harmoniously all our capacities (Plato, Aristotle, Bradley)

Epicurus 341-270 BC

Objections to Egoism Egoism cannot resolve conflicts of interest

(which moral theories should do) Egoism allows for no “moral point of view” of

an ideal observer who is impartial, informed, and imaginatively identifies with those in the situation Egoist response: no one is completely impartial,

nor should moral decisions be dispassionate

Utilitarianism: the good is the greatest amount of happiness for

the greatest number

Bentham: the hedonic calculus is based on the intensity, duration, certainty, immediacy, fecundity, purity, & number of people

J. S. Mill: the quality of pleasures needs to be considered, determined by competent judgesObjection: this is elitist; why not use the criterion

for evaluating pleasures to judge morality itself?

J. Bentham (1748-1843)

J. S. Mill (1808-73)

Variations of Utilitarianism Act utilitarianism: we are obligated to do the

specific act that produces the greatest amount of happiness (regardless of rules or justice)Objections: • consequence calculation is difficult

• the end justifies the meansRule utilitarianism: we should follow moral

rules that, when acted upon, generally produce the greatest amount of happinessObjections: • what about when rules conflict?

• in some cases, why not exceptions?Reply: then why have any theory at all?