After the many discussions we’ve had in class about Mill’s Utilitarianism and many other ethical theories, I still find it hard to believe why anyone would choose to be against Utilitarianism. Just think about it, if everyone followed the Utilitarian calculus and acted in accordance in it, it would lead to a much better society. There’s simply no way it wouldn’t. Yes, the idea of being morally just or having “the good will” behind your actions is all nice and pretty and flowers and rainbows and unicorns, but having those behind your actions can still lead to more pain and negative consequences for others. In the Utilitarian world, the intentions of an action don’t matter, only the consequences. So what if everyone does things for the wrong reasons, as long as it still leads to greater pleasure and less pain for the greatest amount of people.
Would you rather have a society of “good-willed” people that is in shambles and everyone living a bad life, or a land full of people who act not necessarily for the right reasons, but end up with a successful, prominent society?
All hyperboles aside, I do that think that Utilitarianism is the way to go in terms of an ethical theory, because in proper practice it can only lead to positive consequences, unlike other ethical theories that concern themselves with the a priori knowledge rather than the effects of the actions. While the a priori knowledge and intentions behind an action are nice to think about, they are not the most important aspect of action, but rather the consequences of the action itself. If there was a way to combine the a priori knowledge and ethics of Kant with a way to guarantee the consequential actions of Utilitarianism, that would be perfect, but it is impossible to guarantee that all good-willed actions will be for the greatest good of the people, so I’m going to stick with the Utilitarian lifestyle for now.
I’m sure most of you disagree with this and would rather have good-willed motives being the driving force behind actions due to your raising and background, and that’s ok. I’ll just live in my world of positive consequences for those around me as well as myself regardless of motive or a priori reasoning. It is working just fine now so why have a problem with it?
I actually do not disagree with you; I too would prefer a Utilitarian world to a Kantian world. Yes, although having good-willed actions is a good thing, often times the consequences of one’s actions tend to overshadow their intentions. This is especially true if one intends to do good but a negative consequence comes out of it. An example would be the Anne Frank scenario. According to Kant the person at the door should not lie because it is immoral to lie, so they would defend their reason for getting Anne Frank killed to be that they were being moral and not lying. I don’t believe the majority of our world today would defend that person with the reasoning of good intentions of not lying though. Therefore, I would much rather live in a Utilitarian world to where all the consequences of our actions are good.
ReplyDelete