null
US
Sign In
Sign Up for Free
Sign Up
We have detected that Javascript is not enabled in your browser. The dynamic nature of our site means that Javascript must be enabled to function properly. Please read our
terms and conditions
for more information.
Next up
Copy and Edit
You need to log in to complete this action!
Register for Free
64396
Utilitarianism
Description
(Ethics) Mind Map on Utilitarianism, created by Meg Robinson on 30/04/2013.
No tags specified
ethics
ethics
Mind Map by
Meg Robinson
, updated more than 1 year ago
More
Less
Created by
Meg Robinson
over 11 years ago
228
1
0
Resource summary
Utilitarianism
Act- Bentham
Principle of utilty
Usefulness of the outcome of an action
the greatest good for the greatest number
An act is moral if it causes pleasure and reduces pain
'nature has placed us under the governance of two sovereign masters: pleasure and pain'
Hedonic Calculus
Intensity
Duration
Certainty
Propinquity
how near/immediate it will be
Fecundity
how continous it is/will it cause pain or pleasure in the future
Purity
if it's mixed with pain
Extent
Bentham
child prodigy
concerned with social reforms
about benefitting the majority
Humans are motivated by an increase in pleasure
Published in the principles of moral legislation
Rule-Stuart-Mill
Placed importance on happiness not pleasure
Followed Bentham but disagreed with some ideas
Act utilitarianism could allow immoral acts
Act utilitarianism ignore minority rights
Qualiaitive
Higher and lower pleasures
intellectual/cultural/spiritual pleasures vs. physical pleasures
'Better to be a human being disatisfied than a pig satisied, better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied
Greatest happiness for the greatest number
Secondary Principles
we shouldn't evaluate each action but develop rules which make the greatest number happy
prevents immoral acts being allowed
Protects individual rights
If followed universally would produce the greatest happiness
Universability
Everyone should aim for the happiness for everyone else
We should protect the common good
Strong/ weak
Strong utilitarians- should always follow rules
Weak utilitarians- it's okay to break them sometimes
Preference
A good action is one which is in the best interests of most
Hare
'equal preferences count equally'
everyone should be treated with impartiality
we should 'stand in someone else's shoes'
Singer
It's preference not human life which should be valued
our own preferences should have the same weight as those of others
animals also experience pain- should be given the same consideration as humans
Brandt
Morality should be objective- not based on feelings
Talks about the preferences one would have if you went through cognitive psychotherapy: explored the reasons for preferences
Basic principles
teleological
actions are right or wrong dependant on the consequences
Based on hedonism
Pleasure is good
Based on ideas of eudaimonia-living well
Consequentialist
Evaluation
Preference
Strengths
Takes cultural diversity into account
Doing something in someone's best interests can be better than that which makes them happy
Doesn't seek authority from a higher power- rooted in humanity
Gives animals rights
Weaknesses
has the potential to justify any action
Impractical to suggest we can work out what's best for us in the long term
We don't always know what others' preferences are
Requires you to predict consequences
Rule
Strengths
Promotes happiness
Tries to take the minority into account as well
About benefitting people
Don't need to use the hedonic calculus
Doesn't allow immoral acts
More intellectual
Doesn't seek authority from a higher power:rooted in humanity
Weaknesses
Ignores importance of duty
can't predict consequences
Deontological
Higher/lower pleasure
Who can decide which pleasures are worth more
why are intellectual pleasures worth more?
shouldn't physical pleasures be more important
Elitist
How much lower pleasure is equal to higher pleasure
Act
Strengths
About happiness
Makes you consider consequences
Easy principle to understand
Realistic-understands not everyone can be happy
Can be applied to all situations
Can be used by all cultures and religions
Not selfish- about what benefits the majority
Natural- we naturally do what will cause happiness
Not reliant on a deity /divine knowledge
Weaknesses
An evil majority could prevail e.g. allow immoral acts
No concept of duty
Difficult to predict consequences
Doesn't consider intentions
Doesn't consider individuals
what about pain which is good for us?
Difficult to use the hedonic calculus
Use of the hedonic calculus is subjective
Easy to make a decision and twist the hedonic calculus to fit this decision
Show full summary
Hide full summary
Want to create your own
Mind Maps
for
free
with GoConqr?
Learn more
.
Similar
Bowlby's Theory of Attachment
Jessica Phillips
Carbohydrates
Julia Romanów
religious studies religion and human relationships vocab
libbyguillamon
KEY CONCEPTS & CHOICE OF METHOD SCLY2
ashiana121
Environmental Ethics
Jason Edwards-Suarez
Ethics In Psychology Research
amberbob27
Asch Study and Variations
littlestephie
Milgram (1963) Behavioural study of Obediance
yesiamanowl
AS Philosophy Exam Questions
Summer Pearce
Gilded Age
jbryant97
Family
Bryony Whitehead
Browse Library