UTILITARIANISM AND THE MORAL SIGNIFICANCE OF AN INDIVIDUAL

Abstract

A common criticism of classical hedonistic utilitarianism is that it does not fully capture the moral importance of the individual. Often this criticism is framed in terms of examples in which the utilitarian seems forced to endorse the violation of an individual's rights in order to bring about a greater quantity of good, e.g., an innocent person is intentionally executed in order to prevent rioting, murder and mayhem. A utilitarian is liable to respond to such objections in the following way: Such things as justice, the individual, and rights are of secondary importance in ethics. Of fundamental importance is the utility of actions. Upholding justice, showing concern for the individual, and respecting rights tends to increase utility and to that extent such actions are morally justified. But justice, rights, and the individual play such a large and emotional role in our thinking about moral issues that we tend to overlook the fact that their moral importance is wholly grounded in considerations of utility. Thus we mistakenly think we are able to come up with counterexamples to utilitarianism. Given the complexity of any philosophically adequate theory of justice, rights and the individual, it may be difficult to see how to resolve this impasse to the satisfaction of