Embedded Files
What is utilitarianism?
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory − a theoretical account of ethics and a general test of ethical correctness − which is based on the utilitarian principle that we ought to maximize the utility (e.g. happiness) of the consequence of actions, institutions, etc.
Utilitarianism has been a radical and influential ethical theory as it can give simple and clear answers to ethical problems.
Utilitarian philosopher Peter Singer recommends effective altruism according to which we ought to make a donation in an effective way in his TED Talk.
What is Bernard Williams' critique of utilitarianism?
English moral philosopher Bernard Williams raised the famous 'integrity objection' to utilitarianism. Williams argues that the simple-mindedness of utilitarianism fails to understand the value of integrity.
Bernard Williams (1929-2003)
He was one of the most influential moral philosophers in the 20th century. He is famous as a critic of utilitarianism, ethical theories, and modern morality. His critical view towards modern morality is thoroughly expressed in his Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy.
Williams' cases: George and Jim
Williams proposes two cases against utilitarian thinking: the chemist George and the tourist Jim.
The chemist George:
George is an unemployed chemist with a starving family. He believes in opposing chemical and biological warfare (CBW), and he has been actively campaigning against it. Now, he is invited to a huge research project to develop CBW. If he joins, he will be able to support his family with his salary. If he doesn't, George knows that there is another candidate who is more eager to further the research (UFA: 97-8).
The tourist Jim:
Jim is a botanical researcher who is traveling a foreign country but is arrested by the local right-wing militia. Twenty innocent locals are tied up beside Jim, and they are about to be executed by the militia. The commander of the militia proposes Jim a 'guest's privilege' of killing one of the locals. If Jim accepts, the other locals will be let off. If he doesn't, the execution will be done as planned (UFA: 98-9).
Williams' question: What ought they to do?
Williams asks readers to consider what they ought to do in those situations (WME:210). Here, utilitarians would answer that they should obviously act. 'George should participate in the research and Jim should kill one without a doubt.' Williams asks: Is that so? Is the answer so obvious? Do we consider the matter as utilitarians do? In George's case, it might be true that George ought not to participate in the research. In Jim's case, though the killing of one seems intuitively right, the deliberation should not be so simple as utilitarians suggest.
Williams' analysis of the problem of utilitarianism: The problem of negative responsibility
If utilitarian thinking is problematic, what exactly is the cause of this problem? Williams argued that there is negative responsibility working in utilitarian thinking: an agent needs to prevent the greater harm caused by other agents, by doing something less harmful. For example, according to utilitarianism, George should participate in the research to prevent another colleague from furthering the research. Given this conception of negative responsibility, Williams argues, an agent has to sacrifice their project according to other agents' wicked projects, as George has to sacrifice his integrity as a protester of CBW according to the mad scientist colleague's zeal (UFA:104,116). This prevents George's potentially-correct decision not to participate in the research and oversimplifies Jim's hard decision to kill one innocent person.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse