Utilitarianism
coverage works; and if it fails that it can be fixed with less utility sacrifice than a whole life. 24 Precautions would blatantly be taken if the utility of a human life was at stake. For example, hospitals have backup generators for when the power fails because there is a great amount of utility at stake.
3. Football Jim
But we can re- imagine Jones’ situation as similar to ‘Jim and the Indians’ : 25
Dr No tells Jim he will cut off the electricity to the World Cup stadium, ruining the World Cup for 6 billion people unless Jim shoots himself.
There are no alternatives. We may now believe that due to the sheer number of people gaining small ut ility that Jimwill die if the utilitarian approach is taken. Let’s say watching a football match is double as pleasurable as the average pleasure you experience in life and Dr No challenges Jim at half time: taking the audience, there are 228,159 years ’ worth of utility, say, to be gained from the match and maybe 50 years ’ worth for Jim. There is more utility to be gained from Jim’s death . But is it the maximum amount of utility that can be gained from this situation? We can imagine an alternative way out for Jim. Jim could not die and the viewers may be momentarily disappointed but can still get the same happiness from the match by watching it half an hour later once Dr No has been apprehended and the game resumes . The viewer’s momentary disappointment wou ld be cancell ed out by their happiness upon hearing of Jim’s rescue and safe return to his family. Arguably, this would be the only utilitarian action to take.
4. Depression and euthanasia
Does utilitarianism justify the euthanasia of depressed people, people society couldn’t support , indeed anyone who brings down the utility of the population? Because their organs could be used for transplants increasing others' happiness? This idea is also not something utilitarianism would justify. It may be that a large group of people are happy 26 and another group of people are not happy, or in pain, or suffering due to poverty. However, by killing the people currently undergoing negative utility we limit the possible happiness to those who’re already happy. But this is not the maximum amount of utility. More happiness could be created if we take all those who are suffering and make them happy instead of killing them, pull them out of poverty, or take them to see a therapist if they’re depressed. When people assume that utilitarianism would permit/favour some action which we find repugnant, it’s usually because they are making the same mistake of forgetting that , despite the action increasing happiness to some extent, it is not maximizing happiness: you must consider all the possible actions you can take. It may be that if someone cannot have their life improved because of amedically torturous condition, maximizing happiness through killing them is the only way. But most of the time there are better alternatives.
24 This is a perfect real-life example of maximizing utility! 25 Williams 1994: 339.
26 When weighing up options we must consider all utility’s desires, but for the sake of simplicity when responding to the criticism (which centers around pleasure/happiness) I will use happiness, pleasure and utility interchangeably.
96
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs