what is common to all philosophers

Ancient
Utilitarianism
is a modern
theory
this theory originated in 18ᵗʰ century the
age of enlightenemen
what kind of concepts the philosophers did not use that
became
prominent in modern times
3
things
notion of natural did not exist for Aristotle
right
Epicurius Senecia_

the idea of H B born with natural power

right is
of
the to live
privilege right
the concept of obligation or
duty a must do action
virtues are not obligation

of natural law or law of principle

Notion They didn't
cover the idea of law as a principle law as an abstract
object that result in action Only in modern times
philosophers started speaking of law

why People in modernity became interested in these

Argues that christianity as

religion brought
a

along with it the emphasis on duty and obligation

 g amp y g
this notion eventually gained religious grounding
non

other reason is Sciences like Newton 1687 everything

described in 3 laws Nature with time
of philosophers
the idea other words
of Ethics dev of Natural law in

an analogy a
comparcus
on Philosophers made a
point
that the same way Nature is governed by not physics
laws and chem laws Human actions is governed
by
Natural laws

The utilitarians
Jeremy Bentham inspired by Epicurious
diverted and focused and redirected the meaning of pleasure
and happ not
only on individual level but the level
of society at large
utility advantage
These also called co
guys
we need to look at consequence of actions in order to

determine is not
if utility or

Ban them Human beings are pleasure seekers and pain

avoiders He developped principle of utility
action is good it
an approved ifmaximizes the
maximum number
amount of utility to the of people
Morality is smthm that can be quantified
 y g f
Ban them stresses
quantitative nature of sensation
on the

influenced by science of Economics Just like

Economics is quanti study of wealth We should
understand ethics as morals
of
difficulties How do 51
maximum
you define maximum
people did they mean human kind or certain
class of society or specific people

This principle defines the notion of obligations

are
obligations the same as desires No because some

people d

Smoking maybe people desire smoking and makes them

feel good but it is not an obligation as a matter of
is bad for others who inhale it
fact smoking in public
so
utility
Obligations are defined by actions that
on
maximize
to maximum amount people
utility of

is this principle a collective social principle or an individual

here goodness defined to increase to collective

one
utility
people
p p

Are motives or charachters relevant to this principle

No here what matters the most is
maximizing utility
a wicked bad who regularly donates a lot
imagine guy
of money to charity Utilitarians would this action
say
is good the intentions egoistic and wicked
even
if guy's
are

Is happiness understood the same as Aristotle

way
G
Happ here is just collect of utilities it is the sum total
utilities
of

How do we know the actions

if utility
we look at conseg to
did he mean actual consequences
To Banthern cannot be actual
by def
consequences but expected consequences
we do or we commit and not do will have
Every act
endless ad consequences in the future Many possibilities
that would follow from actions we take a don't take
But do we how the future will turn out
know

estimations and calculat of that relies on law of

 f
probability This is the relate with Economics Same
Ethics is the study how
way Happin on
utility can

be maximized
by using probability estimations to maximize
utility depending on past experience

Pleasure calculus
the point of is to
simply measure consequences
He thought morality should
to see
if they maximize utility
have a mathematical equations
we measure expected pleasure and expected pain using
7 parameters on a scale

pleasure consequence not just mine but of all

but wouldn't be expect the pleasure consequence
to

overpower the pleasure of pain of all the people

so
giving 100 to
poor kids
mensely pleasure consey pain consequence
8 covers all the 2 c would cover
Kids's my pain of
happiness giving money
and the kids who
didn't get anything

outweigh the individual loss

Collective
 g
this principle is objective even
if each person puts his
own number the would convert and be objectively
average
almost the same

At the end the numbers

sum
up if pleasure of
an
consequence pain consequence
I am
obligated to doit if I am
wrong
to do it if it is neutral and to
up
me

Is it reasonable to
A I car is fed this algorithm of utilitarians
driving
if this Tesla car comes do to junction either hit
a

wall or kill to Kiob the car would hit the wall

Shoot dow 300 with nuke

passenger plane
a a

is it the
right thing to do It
might be the

practical thing to do

what's annoying it is that it's arbitrary to decide

in numbers
life
 Mill was raised by his father by utilitarians's principles
who was home schooled

when He he thought that smthn about

grew up wrong
Banthem's theory and offered a modification to it and
ammended the
theory of principles