Box 59, Item 683: Draft of Utilitarianism as supererogatory: maximizing versus satisizing in value theory

Title

Box 59, Item 683: Draft of Utilitarianism as supererogatory: maximizing versus satisizing in value theory

Subject

Typescript draft, with emendations and annotations.

Description

Note, one of three papers digitised from item 683.

Creator

Source

The University of Queensland's Richard Sylvan Papers UQFL291, Box 59, Item 683

Contributor

This item was identified for digitisation at the request of The University of Queensland's 2020 Fryer Library Fellow, Dr. N.A.J. Taylor.

Rights

For all enquiries about this work, please contact the Fryer Library, The University of Queensland Library.

Format

[1] leaf. 503.45 KB.

Type

Manuscript

Text

UTILITARIANISM AS SUPEREROGATION:
Maximizing versus satisizing in value theory
One ought always to act in such a way as to maximi2e utility - or, in more
Kantian imperatival form:

Act only in such a way that you action would serve

to maximize net expected utility.

or

explained j

The5 e are ways utilitarianism is sometimes put

naturally these preliminaries have to be followed up by a lot of

{ pt9rl.~1:) :u~/J

work trying to cash out utility in terms of.,\features - such as pleasure or
happiness - of members of some other base class.

But the further detail s are

not the present concern - which is with the maximisation principles which are
in fact corrnnon to
often confused

utilitarianism and other positions, such as consequentialism,

with utilitarianism.

To maximize is however often to go far beyond what is required .
Utilitarianism is now, its main revolutionary force spent, treated with
a gen tle toleration it does not really deserve.

Certainly its application can

still serve for the underwriting of worthwhile causes, such as opposition to
racism or nuclear escalation:

so however can most rival ethical positions.

But

its application can also serve a numb er of undesirable, or even pernicious ends,
and not merely with ~aJ e:
directions.

its serious adoption forces adherents in these

Examples include approaches to world population, the maximization of

numbers being a constrained utilitarian objective, and on Lhe natural

environ-

ment, it being a mere instrument for human (or creature) uti)ity under ut i litarianism.

So, for those with environmental perception and respect, utilitarianism

should not be simply tolerated, as a reasonable and respectable ethical position:
it shou ld be rejected, and bette:, actively resisted.

Citation

Richard Sylvan, “Box 59, Item 683: Draft of Utilitarianism as supererogatory: maximizing versus satisizing in value theory,” Antipodean Antinuclearism, accessed March 28, 2024, https://antipodean-antinuclearism.org/items/show/150.

Output Formats