individuals) that Hobbes cited? What about justice and fairness? What about the morality of the means to success (Machiavelli)?1.1.2 Utilitarianism:Founded by Jeremy Bentham and John Stewart Mill (19thcentury), based on the “utility principle” (usefulness): Everyone should chose the act (act-utilitarianism) or the moral rule (rule utilitarianism) that will bring about the greatest good/happiness for everyone concerned. It focuses on analyzing situations in order to bring about the greatestamount of good consequences with the least amount of bad consequences (happiness overpain). It can be compared to cost-benefit analysis. Newer development: Public Choice Theory. Here, consequences refer to a maximum amount of individual choice, which is toresult in maximal satisfaction of the citizens with a minimum in organizational costs.Advantages:Consequences as well as individual and a decision-making body’s responsibility count as well as the outcome in terms of the public good; seems to a degree workable, since quantifiable and measurable; allows for efficiency (cost-benefit estimates), can take effects on other systems, such as natural environments, other nations or communities into consideration; and is common-sensical: calculates pros and cons.Problems:How to measure happiness? To what degree will one be able to predict the possible outcome (errors, limitations to knowledge, side and long-term effects)? How to determinethe consequences for others? Does the end justify the means? Also, what is considered a burden or a benefit or “in the public interest” depends on subjective judgments and on power relations between different political players; the best result might not be fair; the motivation of the actor is not taken into consideration; the internal rules of organizations are not in the focus of the decision-making process and the rationality of the decision-maker is generally overstated. Human lives would not have an intrinsic value, as for example, Immanuel Kant demands.
Applying utilitarian/an ethics of consequences: a. Find out, what individuals, groups (including animal individuals or species), and environments (your and other organizational environments, natural processes…) will be truly affected by the decision on the issue.b. Find out, what the positive and negative consequences of the proposed action will be for them. Try to differentiate between short and long-term consequences. Base your findings on data and estimates of trends when available.c. Compare the outcome of different solutions to the problem you are facing and determine, which proposal will bring about the greatest overall good.1.2. Motivation and Act: Non-consequentialist or deontological ethical theories,for example, Kant’s ethics of duties and Aristotle’s virtue ethics. The main idea is that consequences should not be primarily considered when judging whether people or their act are moral. Individuals should be judged by “higher standards” than consequences, in which one has invested one’s self-interest.1.2.1 Kant’s Ethics of Duties(Germany, late 18thcentury) He stressed that the only thing one can freely determine, is one’s will and that one
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 6 pages?