As
we’ve seen, consequentialism
maintains that actions which have favorable consequences are ethically good,
and that actions which have unfavorable consequences are ethically bad.
To many people, consequentialism
is a natural way of thinking about ethics. As we’ve stated it, however,
consequentialism is hopelessly vague. It’s fine to say that an action is
morally right if it has favorable consequences and that an action is morally
wrong if it has unfavorable consequences, but it certainly isn’t saying very much
and it leaves lots of questions unanswered. Perhaps most importantly, what counts
as a favorable consequence? Improving the economy? Raising literacy levels?
Converting people to Christianity? What exactly?
Utilitarianism is the kind of
consequentialism which equates good consequences with the production of
happiness, and it’s so much the most common type of consequentialism that
“consequentialism” and “utilitarianism” are often take as synonyms. Let’s begin
our examination of utilitarianism, with a study of one prominent
consequentialist: Jeremy Bentham.