Ch. 2 Objections to Utilitarianism

Since utilitarianism is cold and unsympathizing, it is false.

-Keep in mind the distinction between the morality of an action and the morality of one's character.

Since we are able to and should live without happiness, utilitarianism is false

-Most people have lived without happiness, but involuntarily: they should't have to -Some live without happiness voluntarily for the sake of virtue. These sacrifices are noble, but only insofar as they are done for the sake of happiness -Agent-neutrality/disinteredness -Mill's Golden Rule

Since utilitarianism is too demanding, it is false.

-Our moral duty in terms of right action is to always promote general happiness, not to always act for the reason that one promotes general happiness. -The morality of an action vs. the morality of one's character

Since happiness is unattainable, utilitarianism is false

-Suppose happiness is unattainable, the objection still fails -Happiness has to be understood in a manner consistent with human nature -Happiness is attainable

Since utilitarianism is a godless doctrine, it is false

-Utilitarianism is consistent with Scripture/ with theism

Since utilitarianism isn't properly action-guiding in many cases, it is false.

-We derive moral rules from the principle of happiness -Class response: act- vs. rule-utilitarianism

Since we have no right to happiness, utilitarianism is false

There is no reason why happiness isn't a right to everyone born in a civilized society