Conatus: THIRD EDITION by Tom Wallace - HTML preview

C O N A T U S

One of the best-known theories along these lines is utilitarianism. We could see utilitarianism as a form of distribution and a natural progression from what I’ve said above. Utilitarianism holds that actions are right, in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, and wrong as they tend to promote the reverse of happiness. The supreme good is considered to be the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. There’s a belief by utilitarians that happiness is the supreme good, which does not seem too unreasonable. But, although various attempts have been made, it is difficult to calculate exactly which things make us the most happy.

It could be asked, do we make a judgement on the amount of happiness gained on what is actually occurring or do we base our judgements by defining rules, laws and a system of justice to try to get the greatest happiness? In the first case this could be a very tough and complex process (especially with regard to personal relationships). In the second case it may be very difficult to predict which laws would in fact lead to more happiness and it is easy to see the prospect of severe injustice occurring in order to fulfil a presumed good. It could be asked, is it okay to kill one person in order to save others? On the one hand, we likely believe killing to be wrong in and of itself. On the other hand, saving several others by killing one person is surely worthwhile?

The idea that pleasure or happiness should be the sole determinant of our morality is, however, somewhat questionable. Egoism is

190