Kingston Philosophy Café

A discussion lead by Roger Jennings

Consequentialist moral approaches say we should judge actions by their expected outcomes. But this leaves open the question of how those outcomes themselves should be judged. The utilitarian approach, associated particularly with philosophers Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, is that we should always choose whatever actions are most likely to produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. But what do we mean by happiness and how do we measure it? Should we allow for differences in its quality as well as its quantity and, if so, how? What about actions that add to most people's happiness but make a few very unhappy? Would it be safer to aim at minimising unhappiness rather than maximising happiness? Should we make judgements not only about what is likely, in a given social context, to make most people happy but also about what we think should or shouldn't make them happy? And, if so, on what moral basis do we make those judgements?  How do we balance the happiness of people now alive (who might be rendered most happy by maximising their conspicuous consumption) with the happiness of future generations (to whom we might then bequeath resource depletion and environmental degradation). These are just a sample of the issues that could be considered. Those present, however, can take the discussion in whatever direction would make them most happy!