Theories of Right Action & Their Critics

Transcription

1 Alienation, Consequentialism and the Demands of ity Dr. Clea F. Rees Centre for Lifelong Learning Cardiff University Spring 2013

2 Outline Alienation John and Anne Helen and Lisa The problem The paradox of hedonism Subjective, objective & sophisticated hedonism Consequentialism & the problem of alienation The paradox of (act) consequentialism Subjective, objective & sophisticated (act) consequentialism Features of Railton s consequentialism Sophisticated Act Consequentialism Railton s Defence of Consequentialism Demons Objections & responses Alienation & Schizophrenia

3 Outline What is Railton s main thesis or conclusion?

4 Alienation Alienation What does Railton mean by alienation?

5 Alienation John and Anne Alienation John and Anne John cares for Anne but not for her sake John cares for Anne b/c he cares about good consequences Foot might say, his heart is not in the right place (?) John s attachment seems to be to good consequences rather than to Anne

6 Alienation Helen and Lisa Alienation Helen and Lisa Helen cared for Lisa but not for Lisa s sake Helen cared for Lisa b/c she cares about duties of friendship Foot might say, her heart is not in the right place (?) Helen s attachment seems to be to the duties of friendship rather than to her friend

7 Alienation The problem Alienation The problem The psychologies of both John and Helen show inappropriate distance between: the ways in which they deliberate, decide, consider... and their emotional attachments, friendships, relationships... i.e. their experience of the world is one of alienation the basic problem is not really the distance between two selves rather, it is the very existence of those two selves

8 The paradox of hedonism The paradox of hedonism What is the paradox of hedonism?

9 The paradox of hedonism The paradox of hedonism 1. An ideal hedonist always does what will bring about the greatest happiness for herself. 2. If the ideal hedonist always decides to do what will bring about the greatest happiness for herself, she will not do what will bring about the greatest happiness for herself. 3. An ideal hedonist will not always decide to do what will bring about the greatest happiness for herself. (1,2) 4. An ideal hedonist will not be an ideal hedonist?? (1,3)

10 The paradox of hedonism The paradox of hedonism How does Railton suggest the hedonist escape the paradox?

11 The paradox of hedonism Subjective, objective & sophisticated hedonism The paradox of hedonism Subjective, objective & sophisticated hedonism Subjective hedonism One should always decide what to do by explicitly considering the happiness various options will bring one, and one should then do what will bring one the greatest possible happiness. Objective hedonism One should always do what (of one s available options) will bring one the greatest possible happiness. Sophisticated hedonism One is a sophisticated hedonist if one is an objective, but not a subjective, hedonist.

12 Consequentialism & the problem of alienation Consequentialism & the problem of alienation How does Railton suggest the consequentialist avoid (morally problematic) alienation?

13 Consequentialism & the problem of alienation The paradox of (act) consequentialism Consequentialism & the problem of alienation The paradox of (act) consequentialism Compare: 1. An ideal (act) consequentialist always does what will bring about the best consequences. 2. If the ideal (act) consequentialist always decides to do what will bring about the best consequences, she will not do what will bring about the best consequences. 3. An ideal (act) consequentialist will not always decide to do what will bring about the best consequences. (1,2) 4. An ideal (act) consequentialist will not be an ideal (act) consequentialist?? (1,3)

14 Consequentialism & the problem of alienation Subjective, objective & sophisticated (act) consequentialism Consequentialism & the problem of alienation Subjective, objective & sophisticated (act) consequentialism Subjective (act) consequentialism One should always decide what to do by explicitly considering the overall good one can bring about by the various options available to one, and one should then do what will bring about the most good. Objective (act) consequentialism One should always do what (of one s available options) will bring about the greatest possible overall good. Sophisticated (act) consequentialism One is a sophisticated (act) consequentialist if one is an objective, but not a subjective, (act) consequentialist.

15 Consequentialism & the problem of alienation Subjective, objective & sophisticated (act) consequentialism Consequentialism & the problem of alienation Subjective, objective & sophisticated (act) consequentialism How does Railton use the case of Juan visiting Linda rather than contributing his airfare to Oxfam to support the claim on 159?

16 Features of Railton s consequentialism Features of Railton s consequentialism Railton s position: sophisticated act consequentialism complex conception of good Railton suggests a pluralistic approach in which several goods are viewed as intrinsically, non-morally valuable such as happiness, knowledge, purposeful activity, autonomy, solidarity, respect, and beauty. These goods need not be ranked lexically, but may be attributed weights, and the criterion of rightness for an act would be that it most contribute to the weighted sum of these values in the long run. (149 50)

17 Features of Railton s consequentialism Sophisticated Act Consequentialism Features of Railton s consequentialism Sophisticated Act Consequentialism A sophisticated act consequentialist e.g. Juan is directly attached, committed, emotionally engaged... is not so committed no matter what is morally reflective (barring exceptional circumstances) would cease to be so committed if convinced continuing commitment was immoral subject to various qualifications i.e. it is not quite this simple

18 Features of Railton s consequentialism Sophisticated Act Consequentialism Features of Railton s consequentialism Sophisticated Act Consequentialism A sophisticated act consequentialist: will seek to develop the sort of character, dispositions, rules of thumb etc. which will typically lead her to act in ways which are for the best i.e. the agent does not have to rely on intuition, instinct etc., although these might, of course, provide a starting point... does not act on the relevant counterfactual condition the counterfactual condition simply has to be satisfied Note that: Railton sticks to the formulation will do the greatest good, will result in..., will... but this is intended only to simplify he suggests that a formulation based on expected consequences could be defended in a similar way

19 Features of Railton s consequentialism Railton s Defence of Consequentialism Features of Railton s consequentialism Railton s Defence of Consequentialism Railton s defence of consequentialism, then, involves a qualified defence of alienation acceptance of alienation as a genuine problem consideration of different forms of alienation arguing that sophisticated act consequentialism is less alienating than critics suggest some degree, and forms of, alienation are morally appropriate alienation can, and should, be reduced sophisticated act consequentialism is no worse off than Kantian approaches in many ways sophisticated act consequentialism fares far better than Kantian approaches in other ways

20 Demons Demons Railton: Consequentialism can respond better to a Kantian demon than Kantian ethics can to a consequentialist demon... Is it consequentialism? given conception of good... given this multi-level business... but why insist consequentialism must be a decision procedure? (call it something else if you like... )

21 Objections & responses Objections & responses How does Railton understand the objection raised by Williams and discussed on 154? How does he reply to it?

22 Objections & responses Objections & responses How does Railton respond to Williams s claim that consequentialism is too demanding (160 3)? How does Railton respond to Williams s claim that consequentialism is too disruptive (160 3)?

23 Objections & responses Objections & responses What is the problem of alienation from morality itself (164)? How does Railton recommend responding to it?

24 Objections & responses Objections & responses How well does Railton deal with the various objections he raises e.g. from Bernard Williams? misleading re. negative responsibility b/c ignores what worries Williams most when talking about this i.e. responsibility for others wrong-doing but it is still addressing a concern about negative responsibility in consequentialism more generally

25 Alienation & Schizophrenia Alienation & Schizophrenia Does Railton s sophisticated consequentialism avoid moral schizophrenia?