Sunday, February 12, 2012
Justice: Chapter 2
Sandel spends this chapter critiquing utilitarianism. This is no surprise since he informs us in chapter one that theories of justice are grounded in ethical theories. Recall that utilitarianism is an ethical theory that states the right thing to do in a given situation is to maximize pleasure (or minimize pain) for the greatest number of people who are likely to be effected by the outcome. As such utilitariamsim aplces the morality of act in the conequences that a given action brings about. Sandel discusses two common objections to utilitarianism: One: As an ethical theory it does not respect human dignity/individual rights. Two: it presupposes a "common currency of values", but no such common currency exists. Sandel uses a number of examples throughout the chapter to articualte these criticisms. Some questions we might want to consdier discussing are 1) What do you make of utilitariaism as an ethical theory? Should we always seek to maximize pelasure? Are the criticims he levels against utilitarianism fair? As always these are just suggestions. Please feel free to comment on any aspect of the chapter or book to date.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I guess the part of the chapter that spoke to me the most was John Stuart Mill. I can, to a point, go along with his idea that "As long as I am not harming anyone else, my 'independence is, of right, absolute." Ideally this should be so, but it is the measuring of "harm to anyone else" that is the tricky part. In some ways, many of the current problems we have as a society are because of this. We call the World War II era vets the greatest generation. People, individually, and society as a whole, worried more about their fellow man (family, friends, neighbors, and beyond) than they do today. Look at all of the schools and public buildings that were built at great expense and through great labor at that time. Meanwhile, today it is hard for many (most) places to pass even building maintenance plans. Men volunteered for the war, not because they wanted to be killed, but they thought that it was for the greater good. Employers promised them jobs when they got back because it was the right thing to do. Okay, so I'm talking myself out of the "so long as no one is hurt argument." I certainly don't think we should always seek to maximize pleasure as that is alot of what has gotten the world into the drug and AIDS mess. Minimizing pain, however, doesn't seem so bad.
ReplyDelete