Assignment Value Theory (two pages single-spaced)

4/20/171Introduction to PhilosophyTheory of Value 4Recapitulation•Realism tries to combine:-Va lu e b e lie fs a re d iffe re nt f ro m ‘n o r m a l’ b e lie fs ( t h e subjectivist point -so as to also explain the possibility of deep disagreement)-there are real facts, not just facts created by someone•by deriving value from real facts about human beings, either human beings individually or in groups (societies) > on the basis of a function and a criterion for functioning well•Does this strategy work for all values? It may work for justice, inter-personal relations, but perhaps not for general abstract principles of value or for relations with non-humans.Theories about what makes actions good•We will discuss three views:1.Utilitarianism: good is what leads to the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people2.Kantianism: good is what can be turned into a rational law3.Aristotelianism: good is what flows from/contributes to human well-functioningUtilitarianism•Utilitarianism: an action is good because it brings about the greatest happiness/well-being/pleasure for the greatest numberØOverridingØReally universal and equalØReason-involving in finding out what does bring this about 4/20/172Utilitarianism and Calculating the Greatest Good•One standard objection against Utilitarianism:How to compare different goods/pleasures? How can we calculate the greatest good?•John Stuart Mill (1806-73): pleasures are different, but we can still compare them, at least those of us who know the pleasures involved> They prefer the ‘higher’ kinds of pleasure (of the intellect) > they count for ‘more’Utilitarianism and Fairness•Utilitarianism does justice to the idea that in many cases we value an action because of its consequences> everybody counts equally > seems fair•If the suffering of one person leads to a greater overall well-being, utilitarianism prescribes that action> utilitarianism thus does not seem fairRule Utilitarianism•Utilitarianism tries to circumvent the problem of fairness by introducing rules:> one should introduce rules, including ones for fairness, because they lead to a greater well-being for the greatest number of people> the idea: infringement of the rule may on this occasion lead to more well-being, but not in the long runØDoes this solve all the problems?No, rules which discriminate against minorities in support of the happiness of the majority are still possible > one needs a stronger principle to avoid that: John Rawls proposed the ‘veil of ignorance’: rules should be formulated in isolation from knowledge who is going to profit from them and who is at a disadvantage > doing as if you don’t know where in society you will end up.Utilitarianism and the Evalutionof Persons•One consequence of Utilitarianism is that it is irrelevant who is doing the action and certainly irrelevant who the ones involved in the action areØIf, of two people, you can only save one, and one is your child, then you do not have any reason to save your child and not the other.ØPeter Singer: if you have to choose between a human being and an animal, you do not have a reason to choose either.