Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that says morality is related to the amount of happiness moral acts produce. Although there are many forms of Utilitarianism, in this paper I am concerned only with Act Utilitarianism, a form of Utilitarianism that places moral emphasis on particular acts. For purposes of simplicity, I will be referring to Act Utilitarianism short-hand as Utilitarianism. Further, Act Utilitarianism can be interpreted through a lens of either practical or theoretical ethics. The former is concerned with a theory of ethics which we can apply in our daily lives. The latter focuses on a theoretical perfect account of ethics. I am only concerned with addressing Act Utilitarianism through the lens of practical ethics. In this
…show more content…
The objection takes the following form:
P1: If Act Utilitarianism is true, we can never be certain whether our actions are morally permissible
P2: If we can never be certain if our actions are morally permissible, then we can never feel justified in believing our actions to be right or wrong.
P3: A practical theory of ethics ought to be able to provide us justification for our moral decisions.
C: Therefore, Act Utilitarianism is false as a practical theory of ethics.
I will focus heavily on the first premise of the argument. I will spend some time on premise two. I take premise three to be true based off the definition of a practical theory of ethics. I will spend little time justifying …show more content…
long-term ambiguity objection. The net utility of an action in the long term is undeterminable. A particular action may lead to either positive or negative net utility. These potentialities represent a net expected value of zero: events could go any direction. However, in the short term we can predict with a relative degree of certainty the utility of our actions. The long-term consequences cancel out and we should thus make moral decisions based off clear short term information and other information which we can predict with some certainty (i.e., information with which we can know the
The objection takes the following form:
P1: If Act Utilitarianism is true, we can never be certain whether our actions are morally permissible
P2: If we can never be certain if our actions are morally permissible, then we can never feel justified in believing our actions to be right or wrong.
P3: A practical theory of ethics ought to be able to provide us justification for our moral decisions.
C: Therefore, Act Utilitarianism is false as a practical theory of ethics.
I will focus heavily on the first premise of the argument. I will spend some time on premise two. I take premise three to be true based off the definition of a practical theory of ethics. I will spend little time justifying …show more content…
long-term ambiguity objection. The net utility of an action in the long term is undeterminable. A particular action may lead to either positive or negative net utility. These potentialities represent a net expected value of zero: events could go any direction. However, in the short term we can predict with a relative degree of certainty the utility of our actions. The long-term consequences cancel out and we should thus make moral decisions based off clear short term information and other information which we can predict with some certainty (i.e., information with which we can know the