Average and total utilitarianism
Encyclopedia
All proponents of utilitarianism
believe that the quality of conscious
experience is important; indeed it is the basis of their consequentialist
approach to ethics
. However, it is unclear what it is that is supposed to be maximized: average happiness or total happiness. Two alternative answers to this problem are provided by average and total utilitarianism.
The main problem for Total Utilitarianism is the mere addition paradox
, which argues that a likely outcome of following total utilitarianism is a future where there is a large number of people with very low utility values. Parfit
terms this "the repugnant conclusion," believing it to be intuitively
undesirable.
To survive the mere addition paradox with a consistent model of total utilitarianism, total utilitarians have two choices. They may either assert that higher utility living is on a completely different scale from, and thus incomparable to, the bottom levels of utility, or deny that there is anything wrong with the repugnant conclusion. (Although, Sikora argues that we may already be living within this minimal state. Particularly as quality of life measurements are generally relative and we cannot know how we would appear to a society with very high quality of life.)
Total utilitarianism is also challenged by Nozick's utility monster
, a hypothetical being with a greater ability to gain utility from resources, who takes all those resources from people in a fashion that is seen as completely moral.
utility among a group's members. So a group of 100 people each with 100 hedons
(or "happiness points") is judged as preferable to a group of 1000 people with 99 hedons each. More counter intuitively still, average utilitarianism evaluates the existence of a single person with 100 hedons more favorably than an outcome in which a million people have an average utility of 99 hedons.
Average utilitarianism may lead to repugnant conclusions if practiced strictly. Aspects of Parfit's mere addition paradox
are still relevant here: Even though "Parfit's repugnant conclusion" (mentioned above) is avoided by average utilitarianism, some generally repugnant conclusions may still obtain. For instance, if there are two completely isolated societies, one a 100-hedon society and the other a 99-hedon society, then strict average utilitarianism seems to support killing off the 99-hedon society (this violent action would increase the average utility in this scenario). Parfit himself provided another similar criticism. Average utilitarianism seems to reject what Parfit calls "mere addition": the addition or creation of new lives that, although they may not be as happy as the average (and thus bring down the average), may still be intuitively well worth living. Creating a less-than-average life would become an immoral act.
The hazards of average utilitarianism are potentially avoided if it is applied more pragmatically
. For instance, the practical application of Rule utilitarianism
(or else Two-level utilitarianism
) may temper the aforementioned undesirable conclusions. That is, actually practicing a rule that we must "kill anyone who is less happy than average" would almost certainly cause suffering in the long run. Alternatively, average utilitarianism may be bolstered by a "life worth living" threshold. This threshold would be placed very low (intense suffering) and it is only once a person drops below this threshold that we begin to consider their execution. This obtains the intuition that a generally lower 'average utility' is to be endured provided there are no individuals who would be "better off dead". This would also allow average utilitarianism to acknowledge the general human preference for life.
Average utilitarianism is treated as being so obvious that it does not need any explanation in Garrett Hardin
's essay The Tragedy of the Commons, where he points out that Jeremy Bentham
's goal of "the greatest good for the greatest number" is impossible. Here he is saying that it is impossible to maximize both population (not total happiness) and 'good' (which he takes as meaning per capita happiness), although the same principle of course applies to average and total happiness. His conclusion "we want the maximum good per person" is taken as being self evident.
Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory holding that the proper course of action is the one that maximizes the overall "happiness", by whatever means necessary. It is thus a form of consequentialism, meaning that the moral worth of an action is determined only by its resulting outcome, and that one can...
believe that the quality of conscious
Consciousness
Consciousness is a term that refers to the relationship between the mind and the world with which it interacts. It has been defined as: subjectivity, awareness, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind...
experience is important; indeed it is the basis of their consequentialist
Consequentialism
Consequentialism is the class of normative ethical theories holding that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment about the rightness of that conduct...
approach to ethics
Ethics
Ethics, also known as moral philosophy, is a branch of philosophy that addresses questions about morality—that is, concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and vice, justice and crime, etc.Major branches of ethics include:...
. However, it is unclear what it is that is supposed to be maximized: average happiness or total happiness. Two alternative answers to this problem are provided by average and total utilitarianism.
Total utilitarianism
Total utilitarianism is a method of applying utilitarianism to a group to work out what the best set of outcomes would be. It assumes that the target utility is the maximum utility across the population based on adding all the separate utilities of each individual together.The main problem for Total Utilitarianism is the mere addition paradox
Mere addition paradox
The mere addition paradox is a problem in ethics, identified by Derek Parfit, and appearing in his book, Reasons and Persons . The paradox identifies apparent inconsistency between three seemingly true beliefs about population ethics by arguing that utilitarianism leads to an apparent overpopulated...
, which argues that a likely outcome of following total utilitarianism is a future where there is a large number of people with very low utility values. Parfit
Derek Parfit
Derek Parfit is a British philosopher who specializes in problems of personal identity, rationality and ethics, and the relations between them. His 1984 book Reasons and Persons has been very influential...
terms this "the repugnant conclusion," believing it to be intuitively
Intuition (philosophy)
Intuition is a priori knowledge or experiential belief characterized by its immediacy. Beyond this, the nature of intuition is debated. Roughly speaking, there are two main views. They are:...
undesirable.
To survive the mere addition paradox with a consistent model of total utilitarianism, total utilitarians have two choices. They may either assert that higher utility living is on a completely different scale from, and thus incomparable to, the bottom levels of utility, or deny that there is anything wrong with the repugnant conclusion. (Although, Sikora argues that we may already be living within this minimal state. Particularly as quality of life measurements are generally relative and we cannot know how we would appear to a society with very high quality of life.)
Total utilitarianism is also challenged by Nozick's utility monster
Utility monster
The utility monster is a thought experiment in the study of ethics. It was created by philosopher Robert Nozick in 1974 as a criticism of utilitarianism....
, a hypothetical being with a greater ability to gain utility from resources, who takes all those resources from people in a fashion that is seen as completely moral.
Average utilitarianism
Average utilitarianism values the maximization of the averageArithmetic mean
In mathematics and statistics, the arithmetic mean, often referred to as simply the mean or average when the context is clear, is a method to derive the central tendency of a sample space...
utility among a group's members. So a group of 100 people each with 100 hedons
Felicific calculus
The felicific calculus is an algorithm formulated by utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham for calculating the degree or amount of pleasure that a specific action is likely to cause. Bentham, an ethical hedonist, believed the moral rightness or wrongness of an action to be a function of the...
(or "happiness points") is judged as preferable to a group of 1000 people with 99 hedons each. More counter intuitively still, average utilitarianism evaluates the existence of a single person with 100 hedons more favorably than an outcome in which a million people have an average utility of 99 hedons.
Average utilitarianism may lead to repugnant conclusions if practiced strictly. Aspects of Parfit's mere addition paradox
Mere addition paradox
The mere addition paradox is a problem in ethics, identified by Derek Parfit, and appearing in his book, Reasons and Persons . The paradox identifies apparent inconsistency between three seemingly true beliefs about population ethics by arguing that utilitarianism leads to an apparent overpopulated...
are still relevant here: Even though "Parfit's repugnant conclusion" (mentioned above) is avoided by average utilitarianism, some generally repugnant conclusions may still obtain. For instance, if there are two completely isolated societies, one a 100-hedon society and the other a 99-hedon society, then strict average utilitarianism seems to support killing off the 99-hedon society (this violent action would increase the average utility in this scenario). Parfit himself provided another similar criticism. Average utilitarianism seems to reject what Parfit calls "mere addition": the addition or creation of new lives that, although they may not be as happy as the average (and thus bring down the average), may still be intuitively well worth living. Creating a less-than-average life would become an immoral act.
The hazards of average utilitarianism are potentially avoided if it is applied more pragmatically
Pragmatism
Pragmatism is a philosophical tradition centered on the linking of practice and theory. It describes a process where theory is extracted from practice, and applied back to practice to form what is called intelligent practice...
. For instance, the practical application of Rule utilitarianism
Rule Utilitarianism
Rule utilitarianism is a form of utilitarianism that says actions are moral when they conform to the rules that lead to the greatest good, or that "the rightness or wrongness of a particular action is a function of the correctness of the rule of which it is an instance." For rule utilitarians, the...
(or else Two-level utilitarianism
Two-level utilitarianism
Two-level utilitarianism is a utilitarian theory of ethics developed by R. M. Hare.According to the theory, a person's moral decisions should be based on a set of 'intuitive' moral rules, except in certain rare situations where it is more appropriate to engage in a 'critical' level of moral...
) may temper the aforementioned undesirable conclusions. That is, actually practicing a rule that we must "kill anyone who is less happy than average" would almost certainly cause suffering in the long run. Alternatively, average utilitarianism may be bolstered by a "life worth living" threshold. This threshold would be placed very low (intense suffering) and it is only once a person drops below this threshold that we begin to consider their execution. This obtains the intuition that a generally lower 'average utility' is to be endured provided there are no individuals who would be "better off dead". This would also allow average utilitarianism to acknowledge the general human preference for life.
Average utilitarianism is treated as being so obvious that it does not need any explanation in Garrett Hardin
Garrett Hardin
Garrett James Hardin was an American ecologist who warned of the dangers of overpopulation and whose concept of the tragedy of the commons brought attention to "the damage that innocent actions by individuals can inflict on the environment"...
's essay The Tragedy of the Commons, where he points out that Jeremy Bentham
Jeremy Bentham
Jeremy Bentham was an English jurist, philosopher, and legal and social reformer. He became a leading theorist in Anglo-American philosophy of law, and a political radical whose ideas influenced the development of welfarism...
's goal of "the greatest good for the greatest number" is impossible. Here he is saying that it is impossible to maximize both population (not total happiness) and 'good' (which he takes as meaning per capita happiness), although the same principle of course applies to average and total happiness. His conclusion "we want the maximum good per person" is taken as being self evident.