PHIL 1005 ETHICS

Miriam Animashaun

Explain the Rioting Mob Objection to Utilitarianism described by Smart. How does Smart respond to this case? Does his response ade !ately answer the objection? S!mmary "n my re#ised essay " ha#e made the $ollowing corrections% " ha#e remo#ed new objections $rom the concl!sion. " ha#e tal&ed in greater depth abo!t j!st a co!ple o$ objections namely j!stice as an intrinsic #al!e and Utilitarianism o#ersimpli$ying morality. " ha#e expanded the explanation o$ the rioting mob which was deemed too concise. " ha#e also gi#en a possible co!nter'response to an objection. ()* it was also recommended that the re$erence to the +.S Mill !ote sho!ld ha#e a page n!mber, howe#er the boo& is so old that " co!ld not $ind it.-

Normative ethics is the branch of ethics that investigates hat e shou!" "o in a given ethica! "i!emma# Act $%ti!itarianism is a normative ethica! theor& that sa&s e shou!" "o the act that 'ro"uces the greatest ha''iness# Actions are right in 'ro'ortion as the& ten" to 'romote ha''iness( rong as the& ten" to unha''iness# )*& ha''iness is inten"e" '!easure( an" the absence of 'ain+ b& unha''iness( 'ain( an" the 'rivation of '!easure#,-.#S# Mi!!( Utilitarianism( Ch# /#0 Act %ti!itarianism states that e ought to "o hatever action ou!" 'ro"uce the greatest ba!ance of '!easure over 'ain for a!! concerne"# The theor& is conse1uentia! $ e shou!" "o the act that brings about the best outcome( the theor& is he"onistic 2 ho goo" an outcome is "etermine" b& the ba!ance of '!easure over 'ain an" the theor& is im'artia! 2 ever&one3s '!easures an" 'ains count e1ua!!&#

A!though Act$%ti!itarianism is initia!!& a''ea!ing( a counter$e4am'!e of the theor& ou!" be the case of the 5ioting Mob# In the case of the 5ioting Mob( a horrib!e crime has been committe"# The Mob i!! riot un!ess someone is convicte"# This i!! cause thousan"s of "eaths# 6ou are the Sheriff

PHIL 1005 ETHICS

Miriam Animashaun

2 shou!" &ou frame an" e4ecute an innocent man7 -Note it is sti'u!ate" that &ou 8no this is the on!& a& to avoi" the riot#0 In hich case it ou!" a''ear accor"ing to the %ti!itarian that one innocent man must be 8i!!e" for the common goo" because this i!! create more ha''iness overa!!# The 5ioting Mob case is su''ose" to sho that the Act$%ti!itarian ca!cu!ation 'ro"uces the rong resu!t#

The %ti!itarian cou!" res'on" to the case of the 5ioting Mob b& "is'uting the ca!cu!ation( b& sa&ing the !ong$term conse1uences of '!easure an" 'ain have not a!! been ta8en into account as there ou!" be chaos an" orse riots if the truth rea!!& got out# The 'rob!em ith this res'onse is that the %ti!itarian9s on!& reason for ob:ecting to 8i!! the innocent man is that the conse1uences of the 'ub!ic fin"ing out ou!" be "ire( not because it is rong for those in authorit& to 'ervert the cause of :ustice#

Another o'tion( is to bite the bu!!et# .#.#C# Smart c!aims that in the ver& rare cases here e must harm one to save man&( to refuse is mere!& mora! s1ueamishness# )The case is ana!ogous to one in hich I might have the 8no !e"ge to 'erform a !ifesaving o'eration( but in hich I :ust cou!" not bring m&se!f to cut into human f!esh#,-.#C#C# Smart( )%ti!itarianism an" .ustice(, .ourna! of Chinese Phi!oso'h&( 1;<=#0 Accor"ing to Smart( the intuition that the sheriff must not e4ecute the innocent man is base" on focusing on on!& one act of the situation( name!& the 8i!!ing of an innocent man( rather than the saving of man&# Ho ever( this is "e'en"ent on hether there is a "ifference bet een harm that &ou "o( an" harm that &ou a!!o # In the case of the Sheriff harming the innocent man he is 'ersona!!& cu!'ab!e for harming the innocent# I "o not thin8 that the Sheriff is enab!ing the rioters to ta8e innocent !ife b& not giving them the b!oo" that the& are ba&ing for#

PHIL 1005 ETHICS

Miriam Animashaun

Smart "oes sa& that it is goo" to fee! horror at the thought of 8i!!ing# *ut to !et this sto' &ou from "oing the o'timific thing is se!f$in"u!gent( mora! s1ueamishness#

It is "ebatab!e ho ever( hether the 8i!!ing of the innocent is the o'timific thing# The im'!ication of such a a& of thin8ing( ou!" mean that the en"s a! a&s :ustif& the means( no matter ho horrific# This ou!" mean that if the 'rinci'!e behin" the theor& of %ti!itarianism ere to be a''!ie" to the force" !abour the >erman .e s en"ure"( then it cou!" be argue" that the economic 'ro"uctivit& of the innocent minorit& as arrante"( because of the '!easure that as "erive" b& the ma:orit& out eighe" the o''ression of the minorit&#

?urthermore( the course of action 'ro'ose" b& Smart ou!" be an infringement on the innocent in"ivi"ua!9s human rights# The 'rob!em ith Smarts res'onse is that nobo"& has an& intrinsic va!ue but on!& instrumenta! an" nomina! va!ue# %ti!itarianism is concerne" ith measuring uti!it& hich means usefu!ness( therefore a 'erson9s right to !ive is "e'en"ent on ho much use others can "erive from them being a!ive# The 5ioting Mob case( sho s that %ti!itarianism resu!ts in a t&rann& of the ma:orit& here minorities an" their rights an" vie 'oints count for nothing# Nothing :ustifies in:ustice( to :ustif& in:ustice ou!" be im'!ausib!e# .ustice is more im'ortant than conse1uences( the ru!e of !a must be u'he!" as is "emonstrate" b& the Latin$!ega! 'hrase@ ?iat :ustia ruat cae!um( meaning( !et :ustice be "one though the heavens fa!!# A %ti!itarian res'onse ou!" be that e on!& 'ursue :ustice as a goa!( because it brings about or"er an" stabi!it&( an" if or"er an" stabi!it& can be brought about b& other means then the conse1uences are effective!& the same# Ho ever( this ans er is unsatisfactor& as it :ust !oo8s at the conse1uences an" fai!s to recognise that e have a "ut& to u'ho!" the !a as e!! as a "ut& of beneficence an" non$ma!eficence#

PHIL 1005 ETHICS

Miriam Animashaun

In conc!usion( Smart "oes not succee" in "efen"ing Act$%ti!itarianism against the ob:ection of the 5ioting Mob Case( because there is nothing rong ith anting to 8ee' &our han"s c!ean mora!!&( it "oes not necessari!& constitute mora! s1ueamishness( but rather a "esire to "o the right thing# ?urthermore( b& the %ti!itarian9s o n a"mission( their theor& attem'ts to "erive the greatest goo" for the greatest number of 'eo'!e( an" the ma:orit& of the 'ub!ic ou!" not ant to !ive in a societ& here those in a 'osition of 'o er f!out the ru!es an" use 'eo'!e as a means to an en" rather than as en"s in themse!ves# I ou!" argue that the genera! 'ub!ic ou!" ant to !ive in a societ& here :ustice is u'he!"# %ti!itarianism oversim'!ifies ethics b& :ust focusing on conse1uences( but in or"er for human f!ourishing to occur( e must ta8e into consi"eration not :ust the conse1uences of an act but the act itse!f#

*ib!iogra'h&
.#.#C# Smart( )%ti!itarianism an" .ustice(, .ourna! of Chinese Phi!oso'h& 1;<= .#S# Mi!!( Utilitarianism( 1=AB