Pick one of following topics and write a 5-8 page paper fulfilling the tasks assigned.

Your paper is due in the beginning of class on Wednesday, March 7th.

Topics:

1. The theory of morality offered in Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill is a combination of two more general ethical positions: consequentialism and hedonism. Explain how the central thesis of utilitarianism--what Mill calls "the greatest happiness principle" or "the principle of utility"--is a result of combining these two positions. Their combination seems to give utilitarianism certain desirable features. Explain the supposed merits utilitarianism offers, focusing on the universality and objectivity of moral rightness or wrongness on this view, their worldliness (rather than trascendentness), the sense in which morality becomes scientific-like, and the scope of our moral obligations. Brief comparisons to other views of morality may help illuminate these points.

The appeal to hedonism raises certain worries for utilitarianism. Discuss why, even taking its more sophisticated version of hedonism into account (call it "egalitarian hedonism"), some have called utilitarianism "a doctrine worthy only of swine." What is the worry behind this objection? How does Mill respond to this challenge, and how is this supposed to solve the problem? Next, consider the effects of Mill's response on the supposed merits of utilitarianism mentioned above. How might one object that his response introduces a complication that undermines them? Give an example to illustrate the problem. Is there anything Mill could say to deflect this challenge? Discuss the bearing of Taylor's general point with respect to what Mill might say here. Finally, discuss whether you think the problems utilitarianism faces on this front invalidate the view, or whether they can be overcome. Give reasons for your position.

2. As in the first topic, explain how utilitarianism is a combination of consequentialism and hedonism. Discuss its merits, focusing on how morality is universal, objective and scientific-like, worldly, and appropriately ranging on this view. Brief comparisons to other views of morality may help make these points clear.

Utilitarianism's consequentialist aspect raises certain concerns about the view. The greatest happiness principle tells us that, given a range of options, the morally right action to perform is the one that results in the greatest amount of happiness or pleasure. (In some circumstances the way to think about maximizing happiness is in terms of minimizing suffering or pain.) Explain how this focus solely on the consequences of an action leads utilitarianism to recommend "scapegoating" in certain circumstances. Give an example illustrating such a situation, making clear how the issue is not one about the distribution of happiness or suffering. Why do the recommendations of utilitarianism seem problematic in cases like this? Bring the objection raised by Williams regarding negative responsibility and integrity to bear on this discussion. In what way does Williams' argument seem to extend the problem exemplified in cases of scapegoating? Are there any responses a utilitarian could make to these challenges? Discuss whether you think the objections to its consequentialist aspect undermine utilitarianism, or whether you think the view can stand up to them. Give reasons for your position.