Ethics: A Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory (2nd ed.), pp. 162-173, and Mr. Hinman’s website at http://ethics.acusd.edu)
The basic goal of Utilitarianism is to produce the greatest good for the greatest number.
In this view, morality is more about good consequences than good intentions.
Utilitarianism is often spoken of in terms of "quick and dirty" or inelegant solutions to problems, sometimes the implication that we ourselves will benefit from the action. However, utilitarianism asks that we must:
Act to maximize utility, not just do the minimum.
Set aside personal interest in the interest of the greater good, though one’s own personal needs may be included as one individual along with the rest of the group.
One major goal of utilitarianism is to "bring scientific certainty to ethics." We just need to decide which courses of action will produce the greatest positive effect for the world. However, as we will see, this may be easier said than done!
We will now look at the development of Utilitarian thought so that we can get a better grasp of where Utilitarians are coming from, and how they try to measure "overall positive effect":
Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) believed that we should try to increase the overall amount of pleasure in the world, and decrease pain. He defined "pleasure" as "deprivation replaced by fulfillment."
This definition was easy to quantify, as it focused on things of short duration and of bodily orientation, like food or sex.
However, others (such as John Stuart Mill, Bentham’s godson, thought of it as "the pig’s philosophy"—it ignored the higher things in human life. In our own time, it would suggest that a "pleasure machine" based on direct neural stimulation would be more or less an unqualified good thing.
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) suggested that happiness, not pleasure, would be a better measure of utility.
This was more specific to humans, especially with regard to pursuit of long-term goals that could require short-term pain or sacrifice.
However, "happiness" is more difficult to measure than pleasure. Also, different people are made happy by different things.
British philosopher G.E. Moore (1873-1958) suggested that what we need to maximize is ideal values like knowledge, justice, and beauty. However, these are still hard to quantify, and visions of beauty are quite subjective.
Kenneth Arrow of Stanford (still alive) is a Nobel Prize-winning economist. He suggests that the goal that we should strive for is "preference satisfaction." Much like the college elective system, this lets people choose for themselves what has intrinsic value.
Utilitarianism is often used to make decisions in public policy. To make a Utilitarian decision, we have to calculate a number of things: How many people will be affected by our decision, how much they will be benefited or inconvenienced, and alternatives weighed.
Hinman suggests the example of a school lunch program:
Benefits would include better nutrition for a group of children, increased academic performance, and perhaps economic benefit to contractors.
Costs would include taxpayer burden, plus the question of whether the money might do more good elsewhere.
Plus the "do nothing at all" option should be considered as well.
Each factor must be weighted by the number of people affected and the intensity of the effects.
There is also the "apples and oranges" problem: some things are hard to compare! How much can one trade a dinner for a good night’s rest?
Also, some things are simply hard to quantify. "Time spent with family and friends" may not be accounted for well in the decision-making process, because other things (money, material goods) are easier to measure.