by Sharon Kaye
• Because animals have preferences, meat-eating and all forms of factory farming are morally wrong.
• Because human foetuses are incapable of having preferences (at least through the first four and a half months of development), abortion is not morally wrong.
• Because people with various forms of brain damage (including Alzheimer’s disease) have no preferences, euthanasia (mercy killing) is not morally wrong.
• Because human beings acquire preferences slowly as they gain rationality, autonomy and self-consciousness, killing a newborn infant is not as bad as killing a fully competent adult.
• Instances of bestiality, in which a human and an animal both voluntarily engage in sexual relations with one another, are not morally wrong.
• Since preferring luxuries is not as important as preferring basic needs, people in affluent nations are morally obligated to give their excess wealth to people in Third World nations.
Singer has written several bestselling books and appeared on popular television shows, including the American satirical news show The Colbert Report.
Suppose every time he had the urge to write a symphony, Mozart simply opted to take a bubble bath instead. Writing a symphony involves a great deal of effort, with periods of frustration and even agony. Mill’s theory seems to imply not only that Mozart is under no obligation to suffer for his music, but that he shouldn’t suffer for it. Being morally obligated to maximize happiness, it seems he should do something more pleasant with his afternoon.
In fact, perhaps we should invent a pleasure machine that would stimulate the pleasure centre of the brain just like cocaine, except without the negative side effects. We could all plug in to the machine all day long and forget about ever accomplishing anything.
The concern for quality
Mill would point to two flaws in the above reasoning.
First, utilitarianism is not about maximizing pleasure for oneself only – it’s about maximizing pleasure for everyone. So, if it turns out that Mozart can make a great deal of other people very happy with his music, then he is morally obligated to produce it after all. Far from being too lenient a theory, utilitarianism runs the risk of being too demanding, insofar as it requires us all to strive to maximize happiness for everyone all the time.
Second, unlike Bentham, Mill distinguishes between higher and lower pleasures. He would argue that playing music is more valuable than merely listening, and that writing music is more valuable than merely playing, even though the difficulty increases in each case.
Why is this?
Because the greater difficulty implies a greater satisfaction and value. In Mill’s view, composing a symphony, despite the struggle involved in its creation, is so deeply satisfying and valuable that Mozart would never have traded it for an afternoon in the tub.
It is indisputable that the being whose capacities of enjoyment are low, has the greatest chance of having them fully satisfied; and a highly endowed being will always feel that any happiness which he can look for, as the world is constituted, is imperfect. But he can learn to bear its imperfections, if they are at all bearable; and they will not make him envy the being who is indeed unconscious of the imperfections, but only because he feels not at all the good which those imperfections qualify. It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides.
John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism, Ch. 2 (http://www.utilitarianism.com/mill2.htm)
We must all strive to become ‘highly endowed beings’ with a greater capacity for enjoyment of higher pleasures.
The greater satisfaction or value involved in higher pleasures is not captured by Bentham’s hedonic calculus, which attempts to quantify pleasure in seven different ways. Mill’s concern for higher pleasures adds, not an eighth way to quantify pleasure, but a whole new qualitative dimension. Mill’s concern for the quality of pleasures takes his utilitarianism beyond Bentham’s hedonism.
Of course, the question arises whether Mill can explain what exactly counts as a ‘higher-quality pleasure’ and why. What about those who like pop music better than Mozart? Do pop music lovers have a lower capacity for enjoyment? Or is the quality of a pleasure a completely subjective matter? Either possibility presents a challenge to someone who is trying to maximize happiness for everyone.
Acts vs. rules
Another common criticism of utilitarianism is that its relentless quest for happiness threatens to violate human rights. Consider the following scenario.
You are the sheriff of a small town where a series of murders has occurred. You have good reason to believe the killer has skipped town, but an angry mob is convinced that the killer is a homeless man who wandered into town a week ago. The mob is preparing to riot unless you arrest and execute the homeless man. The homeless man has no family and would be easy to frame. The riot, on the other hand, would result in a great deal of property damage as well as injury and probably death. What should you do?
It looks as if a utilitarian will have to frame the homeless man. Yet most people intuitively feel that framing an innocent man is deeply wrong, regardless of the consequences of not doing so. We seem to have a sacred duty to uphold the truth and protect the innocent. How do we square this with the utilitarian directive to maximize happiness?
Mill suggests that, when we are considering whether an act is ethical, we shouldn’t consider it alone as a one-time occurrence but rather as a type of action. This is to say that Mill promoted rule utilitarianism as opposed to act utilitarianism.
So, as sheriff, you shouldn’t ask yourself which is more conducive to happiness: framing the homeless man or risking the riot? Instead, you should ask yourself which is more conducive to happiness: defending human rights or ignoring human rights? Overall, Mill thinks, you will find that cases like that of the sheriff are rare; for the most part, a society that recognizes rights is far happier than one that doesn’t. By this reasoning, utilitarians must recognize rights.
Notice, however, that, even if you accept the rule-utilitarian approach, your conception of rights is not the same as the traditional conception. For example, the United States Declaration of Independence states: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…’ For the utilitarian, a ‘right’ is nothing so noble – it’s merely shorthand for a policy that usually maximizes happiness.
Bentham, who was an act utilitarian, called rights ‘nonsense on stilts’. Needless to say, he was critical of the Declaration of Independence and the entire American Revolution.
Liberty and equality
While Bentham’s hedonistic utilitarianism made him politically conservative, Mill’s qualitative, rule utilitarianism made him a progressive. He wrote a book called The Subjection of Women (1869) in which he makes a pioneering argument for female suffrage (women’s right to vote). He campaigned for this reform on utilitarian grounds in Parliament in 1865. Being ahead of his time, he was of course roundly defeated, but he put the issue on the table so forcefully that it never went away.
Spotlight
Harriet Taylor (1807–58) was Mill’s great collaborator in life. Although she was married to another man and already the mother of three when she met Mill, she immediately began exchanging ideas with him and reading his work. Without divorcing, she separated from her husband so that she could pursue a platonic (yeah, right) relationship with Mill. After 21 years and the death of Taylor’s husband, the two philosophers finally married. Mill credits Taylor as a co-author for most of his publications. He was heartbroken when she died just seven years later.
Mill also wrote a book called On Liberty, which advanced the cause of political liberalism launched by his predecessor Jo
hn Locke, whom we met in Chapter 7. Mill uses his utilitarian principles to argue for greater freedom and equality. Beyond exhorting the reader to choose government policies that will maximize happiness, he points to the positive long-term consequences of liberalism. Utilitarianism is sometimes called consequentialism because it is concerned not with principles but with results.
For example, Mill makes an impassioned case for free speech. Someone might be in favour of censorship based on a duty to uphold and defend the truth. Mill argues, however, that such a policy has disastrous consequences for four main reasons.
1 The censored opinion may turn out to be true.
2 It may contain a portion of the truth or an error that helps bring the truth to light.
3 Even if the censored opinion is completely false, letting it air will prompt a vigorous defence of the truth, which keeps it from becoming an empty prejudice.
4 People develop character through the experience of defending the truth.
At the heart of Mill’s liberalism is the conviction that the freedom and equality promoted by political liberalism are required in order for human beings to develop individuality, and individuality is crucial for becoming a ‘highly endowed being’ capable of enjoying the higher-quality pleasures that constitute true happiness.
It really is of importance, not only what men do, but also what manner of men they are that do it. Among the works of man, which human life is rightly employed in perfecting and beautifying, the first in importance surely is man himself. Supposing it were possible to get houses built, corn grown, battles fought, causes tried, and even churches erected and prayers said, by machinery – by automatons in human form – it would be a considerable loss to exchange for these automatons even the men and women who at present inhabit the more civilized parts of the world, and who assuredly are but starved specimens of what nature can and will produce. Human nature is not a machine to be built after a model, and set to do exactly the work prescribed for it, but a tree, which requires to grow and develop itself on all sides, according to the tendency of the inward forces which make it a living thing.
John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, Ch. 3 (http://www.bartleby.com/130/3.html)
While being concerned only with results, Mill at the same time insists that it matters how the results are achieved. This is an interesting tension in his position. Critics regard it as a condemning contradiction; supporters regard it as an opportunity for further development.
Spotlight
Bentham left instructions for his body to be embalmed, dressed and placed sitting in a display case at University College, the university for nonconformists that he helped to found in London. Because his head became horrifically misshapen during the embalming process, it was replaced with a wax likeness. Bentham’s body remains on display today, cheerfully greeting passers-by. On the 100th and 150th anniversaries of the university it was brought to the university council meeting and listed as ‘present, but not voting’.
Key ideas
Act utilitarianism: The view that, when considering whether an act is ethical, we should consider it alone as a one-time occurrence
Applied ethics: The area of philosophy that explores the implications of ethical theories for contemporary moral issues
Consequentialism: Another name for utilitarianism because it is concerned not with principles but with results
Hedonic calculus: Bentham’s system for quantifying pleasure
Hedonism: An ethical theory that recommends maximizing pleasure and avoiding pain, with attention to the quantity not the quality of the pleasure
Rule utilitarianism: When considering whether an act is ethical, we should consider it as a type of action rather than a one-time occurrence
Utilitarianism: The view that the ethical act is the one that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people, where happiness is conceived in terms of higher-quality pleasures
Fact-check
1 On which of the following grounds might a utilitarian argue against lying?
a Lying is a sin against God
b Lying tends to make people unhappy
c When rational agents lie they contradict themselves
d Truly rational agents cannot lie
2 What is the difference between hedonism and utilitarianism?
a Hedonists are concerned about the quality of the pleasure; utilitarians are not
b Utilitarians are concerned about the quality of the pleasure; hedonists are not
c Hedonists consider the ethical act as a type of action; utilitarians consider it as a one-time occurrence
d Utilitarians consider the ethical act as a type of action; hedonists consider it as a one-time occurrence
3 Which of the following authors was against the American Revolution?
a Bentham
b Mill
c Kant
d Singer
4 Singer is against meat-eating on which of the following grounds?
a It’s unhealthy
b It’s an unnecessary luxury
c Animals are unclean
d Animals prefer to live a pleasant life
5 Which of the following is a rule-utilitarian consideration?
a If I cheat on this test, I might get caught
b Cheating violates the duty to be honest
c Truly rational agents are incapable of cheating
d Cheating tends to cause more problems than it solves
6 Which of the following is not one of the criteria in Bentham’s hedonic calculus?
a Intensity
b Propinquity
c Extent
d Quality
7 Which of the following is a question from applied ethics?
a Should I tell my children the truth about Santa Claus?
b Is it wrong for businesses to produce toxic waste?
c Why should I be moral?
d Does moral obligation come from reason or experience?
8 Mill and Bentham were both which of the following?
a Political liberals
b Rationalists
c Empiricists
d Hedonists
9 Which of the following is not one of Mill’s arguments for free speech?
a Everyone has a natural right to speak their mind
b False opinions may help bring the truth to light
c Censored opinions may turn out to be true
d Defending the truth gives people character
10 Why do people need freedom and equality, according to Mill?
a To develop individuality
b To earn a better income
c To uphold traditional duties
d To avoid hard work
Dig deeper
Thomas Nagel, The Possibility of Altruism, new edn (Princeton University Press, 2012)
H.O. Pappe, John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor (University of Melbourne Press, 1960)
J. Skorupski, John Stuart Mill (Routledge, 1989)
11
Nietzsche and meaning
‘When you look into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you.’
Friedrich Nietzsche
In this chapter you will learn:
• why Nietzsche despises all modern religion
• about the will to power, Nietzsche’s most famous thesis
• the meaning of Zarathustra’s announcement that God is dead
• about the godlike being whom Nietzsche called the Übermensch
• the significance of the Greek gods Apollo and Dionysus for Nietzsche’s philosophy
• about nihilism and its relation to perspectivalism
• How Heidegger investigated ‘the being’ of being itself
• the meaning of continental philosophy.
Thought experiment: eternal recurrence
You wake up in the morning to your phone ringing.
‘Hello?’ you sputter.
It’s your boss. Today is your birthday and, although you were scheduled to work a long shift, y
our boss has found a way to give you the day off instead.
‘Take it free and clear, as a gift.’
‘But…’
‘No “buts!”’ your boss chimes merrily. ‘Everything is taken care of. Only one thing is required of you.’ Here, your boss’s voice turns serious. ‘Make the most of this day. I mean really seize it. You must live this day like it was the last day of your life.’
You hang up the phone, suspicious. Have you been exposed to some fatal radiation that will kill you by midnight?
‘Suppose that were true… How would I spend this day?’ you wonder.
A few ideas occur to you: max your credit cards out with a flight to Paris or Napa Valley and dinner in the most expensive restaurant you can find…
But who wants to spend their last day on a plane, and, besides, who will end up paying the debt? It doesn’t seem fair to leave that behind…
Better to spend the day in the company of friends, you decide, and set about calling people. But, of course, everyone is busy with work and school, the never-ending demands of their lives. No one is available to play hooky with you.
‘Well, there are a few things I’ve been meaning to get done… Starting with a good shave, a few errands, then maybe some shopping. After I take care of some things, I can sit down and think about what I might like to do with my day…’
The day goes by quickly.
It was a good day. You got a bunch of things done and didn’t have to hurry up to go anywhere. But it wasn’t an especially great day – on the boring side, actually. You finally sit down with a tub of ice cream wondering once again whether you will be dead by midnight.