Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
find ourselves. In some situations, the theory will direct us to make the
best of a bad situation.'
9
Note that being able to determine the utility of an action in theory
is sufficient. Utilitarianism does not necessarily require of an agent to
calculate utilities before every action. Most likely, it does not. Instead,
utilitarianism would require adopting a decision procedure that is most
likely to maximize welfare.
10
'Objects of moral evaluation' or 'evaluative focal points' are things
on which we focus when trying to maximize welfare. Examples are acts,
rules or motives.
11
Evaluative focal points can be evaluated either directly
or indirectly. Evaluating the focal point directly means to apply the
principle of rightness directly to whatever focal point is to be evaluated.
There are many possible forms of direct utilitarianism, depending on
what are taken as legitimate evaluative focal points. Acts are not neces-
sarily the only evaluands that a utilitarian can evaluate with respect to
the maximization of welfare. Global utilitarians, for instance, propose to
evaluate everything in that respect, thus naturally also decision proce-
dures.
12
There are direct utilitarian theories that accept only one evalu-
ative focal point, for instance acts. There are also theories that accept
several direct evaluative focal points. Indirect utilitarianism applies the
theory of the right only to one central evaluative focal point. Other
evaluative focal points are evaluated only indirectly in terms of their
relation to the central one. Rule utilitarianism is an example of an indi-
rect utilitarian theory. Rules are evaluated directly in terms of the goal of
maximizing welfare. ('Choose the rule that maximizes welfare.') Acts are
judged right whenever they conform to the right rules.
Utilitarianism is both
universalist
and
impartialist
with regard to the
issue of whose welfare counts in determining the value of outcomes.
13
Universalism refers to the requirement that the welfare consequences
for
everyone that is affected
by an action must be taken into account. The
typical utilitarian understanding of impartiality is that 'each counts for
one and none for more than one'. That means that every affected being
counts
equally
; the consequences of an action in terms of welfare for
each affected being are taken equally into account.
It is common to distinguish between two underlying rationales for the
duty of neutral welfare maximization.
14
The duty to neutrally maximize
welfare can be conceived of as arising from the fact that welfare is the
sole ultimate good to be maximized. The duty to neutrally maximize
welfare can also be conceived of as arising from an underlying concern
with equal consideration. On this latter rationale, the basic goal is to
give all equally strong interests equal consideration, no matter whose
Search WWH ::
Custom Search