Lesson video

Hello, my name is Mrs. Rawbone and I would really like to welcome you to this lesson on teleology and due utilitarianism.

Today, we're going to learn about really important ethical theory that's had a huge impact on many of the laws that we currently use.

By the end of today's lesson, you will be able to apply utilitarian ethics to scenarios as a way of demonstrating knowledge of teleological ethics.

We're going to be using a few keywords today.

They are greatest good, Jeremy Bentham, teleological ethics, and utilitarianism.

Greatest good is the idea that actions should produce the most happiness for the most people.

Jeremy Bentham was an 18th century philosopher and social reformer who developed utilitarianism.

Teleological ethics are ethical theories that focus on the outcomes or consequences of an action.

And utilitarianism is an ethical theory that focuses on achieving the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

There are two parts to our lesson today on teleology and utilitarianism.

The first part will be on the nature of teleological ethics and the second on utilitarian ethics.

So let's get started on looking at the nature of teleological ethics.

There are different ways of making ethical decisions.

Alex has asked Lucas and Laura for some advice.

He says, "Should I let my friend copy my homework?" Lucas says, "If you do, you might get into trouble." And Laura says, "But if you do, it would make them feel better." In this example, although Lucas and Laura have given Alex different advice, they have both based their advice on the consequences of Alex's actions.

The word teleology comes from ancient Greek.

The word has two parts, teleo and ology.

Teleo comes from telos, meaning end goal or purpose.

Logic comes from logia meaning reason.

That is our ability to work things out.

So a teleological approach to ethics judge its actions as right or wrong based on their outcomes or consequences.

A teleological approach to ethics is different from a deontological approach.

Sometimes both approaches can advise the same action.

Let's look at two examples.

Firstly, donating to charity.

Donating to charity might be good because the outcome will be that it reduces suffering in the community.

This is a teleological approach.

Whereas donating to charity might be good because it's a moral duty to help those in need.

This is a deontological approach.

Let's have a think about keeping promises.

Keeping a promise made to a friend is good because doing so will create trust and improve your relationship.

That's a teleological approach.

Always keeping promises because breaking them is wrong is a deontological approach.

So let's check your understanding.

Is this statement true or false? An example of teleological ethics is always telling the truth because you think lying is wrong.

Take a moment to decide your answer and think about the reason for your choice as well.

Pause the video and then come back to me.

Well done if you put false.

This is not an example of teleological ethics because in teleological ethics, it's not that something is always right or always wrong, it's about the outcome it produces.

So let's have a think about why.

This is not technological ethics because technological ethics is based on the outcomes or consequences of an action.

So lying might not be wrong if the consequences of it are good.

So teleological ethics is the idea that we should make ethical decisions based on their outcomes or consequences.

Let's use an example to think about how this approach might work.

A group of friends find a wallet on the ground.

They have a choice about what to do.

They could take the wallet or they could return the wallet to its owner.

If they're thinking teleologically, then the outcome of taking the wallet might be that they gain extra money and they can spend this on things they need.

But the outcome of returning the wallet is that the owner recovers their property and they avoid stress.

Let's check your understanding.

What is teleological ethics? Is it A, deciding if something is right or wrong based on the rules you should follow no matter the outcome? Is it B, deciding what is right based on what tradition says is correct? Is it C, deciding if something is right or wrong by how much it helps you reach a goal? Take a moment to think about your answer and jot down what you think is the correct letter.

Pause the video and come back to me.

Well done if you chose C, deciding if something is right or wrong by how much it helps you reach a goal.

Remember that word telos, it means goal and or purpose.

So let's practise our understanding on the nature of teleological ethics.

Which two examples use a teleological approach to decision making and why.

A, donating to charity because it will make other people happy.

B, refusing to lie to protect my friend's feelings because lying is wrong.

C, letting my little brother play on my phone because I should set him a good example.

D, doing homework instead of going out with friends so that I get better grades.

E, holding a door open because it is polite.

So take some time.

Think about which two examples use a teleological approach, make a note of them and also of the reasons for your choice.

Pause the video and come back to me.

So let's check your work.

Here's what you could have said.

A is teleological, donating to charity because it will make other people happy.

This is teleological because it's based on the outcome or consequence.

Donating to charity results in happiness for other.

D is also teleological, doing homework instead of going out with friends so that I get better grades.

This is because the decision is based on the outcome or consequence, the goal of getting better grades, which will lead to future success or opportunities.

Well done if you chose A and D and if you put some reasons similar to these ones.

So now that we know what teleological ethics is, let's have a look at a particular theory.

We're going to study utilitarian ethics.

Here, you can see a painting of Jeremy Bentham.

He was born in 1748 in London, England.

A bright and curious thinker, he questioned whether laws and practises were fair.

Bentham is known for his idea of utilitarianism, which says action should bring about the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

He spent his life pushing for changes to improve society, especially in law, prisons, and in education.

Utilitarianism weighs up the good caused against the harm caused by an action.

Now Jeremy Bentham believed that the right thing to do was whatever brought about the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

He argued that we should always make decisions with the goal of creating the most happiness and reducing suffering for as many people as possible.

This idea focuses on the outcomes or consequences of our actions, suggesting that the moral value of any action can be determined by how much good it creates for others and this is even if it involves some personal sacrifice.

For Bentham, the greatest good for the greatest number was the measure of what makes an action truly right or wrong.

Now to help people understand how to measure the greatest good for the greatest number, Bentham introduced the principle of utility.

This principle suggests choosing actions that create the most overall happiness or and reduce pain.

For example, if you decide whether to help a friend move or stay home and relax, Bentham would ask you to think about what option results in the greatest good.

Helping your friend would make them happier and reduce their stress, which could have a positive effect on the other people that they interact with.

In contrast, staying home might bring you some enjoyment, but it only benefits you.

If helping your friend creates more happiness overall, it's the greater good, and Bentham would say that it's the better choice.

A good example of a law reflecting utilitarian principles is the law against drink driving.

This law aims to protect public safety by preventing accidents caused by impaired drivers.

By banning driving under the influence of alcohol, it helps create a safer environment for everyone on the road promoting the greatest good.

Strict penalties for drink driving helped deter this dangerous behaviour and ensure the well-being of society as a whole.

So they bring about the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

What other laws are based on the principle of producing the greatest good for the greatest number of people? Take a moment to think.

Have a discussion with someone nearby or pause and talk to me.

So let's check your understanding.

Is this statement true or false? Drink drive laws are based on utilitarian principles.

Take a moment to jot down your answer.

Pause the video and come back to me.

Well done if you said true.

And that's because laws against drink driving promote the greatest good by ensuring the safety of most people and avoiding harm.

So Jeremy Bentham wasn't just a philosopher, he was a social reformer and he applied his theory to prison reform in particular.

He thought that everyone's happiness should be treated equally, meaning we should care about the well-being of all people, not just ourselves.

He was deeply concerned with how society treated its most vulnerable members, particularly those in prison.

Now in the 18th century, the prison system was harsh, focusing mainly on punishment rather than rehabilitation, which means it didn't focus on helping offenders to reintegrate and become part of society again.

Bentham wanted to change that.

He believed that the aim of the prison system should be to reduce suffering and help people improve, not just make them pay for their crimes.

He argued that a new approach could help everyone, both prisoners and society as a whole.

Here, we can see a picture of the plan for the panopticon.

This is one of his most famous ideas and was a special type of prison.

It was designed as a large circular building where guard could watch every prisoner without the prisoners knowing when they were being observed.

Bentham thought this would encourage prisoners to behave well because they would always feel like they might be watched, and this would lead to fewer crimes and less harm in the long run.

Bentham push for reforms that he thought would make the world a better place, not just for a few, but for everyone.

Can you think of any modern laws aimed at creating the greatest good? Take some time, talk to somebody nearby or talk to me.

Pause the video and come back to me.

Let's use an example to think about how utilitarian ethics might work.

The question is, should you volunteer at an animal shelter or should you go to the park with your friends? You need to think about what your options are.

You could go to the shelter and if you do, you'll be helping the animals.

But if you go to the park, you will make memories with your friends.

The good cause by going to the shelter is that the animals will benefit, but there is also some harm, your friends will miss out.

The good caused by going to the park is that your friends will benefit, but the animals will miss out.

Utilitarianism says that you need to choose the action which produces the greatest good for the greatest number.

So you need to think about how much good is produced, how much harm is done by each outcome, and weigh up which is overall the greatest amount of good.

So when we apply utilitarianism, the decision process looks like this.

Number one, identify what options you have.

Number two, predict the outcomes for each action.

Number three, weigh the happiness against the pain.

And number four, choose the greatest good for the greatest number.

So let's check your understanding of how utilitarianism works.

According to Jeremy Bentham, what type of action produces the greatest good? Is it A, one that benefits the person who performs it most? Is it B, one that produces the least amount of pain and the most amount of happiness for the greatest number of people? Or is it C, one that follows the most rules? Take a moment, think about your answer, jot it down, pause the video if you need to and come back to me.

Well done if you chose B, one that produces the least amount of pain and the most amount of happiness for the greatest number of people.

One criticism of utilitarianism is that it can be difficult to calculate how much happiness or pain will be produced by an action.

Let's use an example to help us think about that.

Should I spend my money on a gift for a friend or should I donate it to charity? If I spend it on a gift for my friend, she will be happy because I've bought her a gift.

But if I give it to charity, those who benefit from my donation will be happy.

It's difficult to know exactly how much happiness will produce if I give my friend a gift.

Her happiness might make other people happy.

And it's also difficult to work out how much happiness my donation to charity would resort in because it could be just the one person that is helped or it might be that more than one person is helped.

Let's have a go at applying utilitarianism.

The trolley problem is a thought experiment first proposed by someone called Philippa Foot in 1967, and it explores moral or ethical decisions.

Because it's a thought experiment, that doesn't mean it's a likely thing to happen or that it's realistic.

It's just designed to get you thinking about how you come to a decision.

So in this example, a runaway trolley, which is basically like a train carriage or a trail, it is heading towards five people who are tied to the track.

You stand by a lever that can switch the trolley to another track where one person is tied down.

Your dilemma then is whether to pull the lever.

If you pull the lever, then that one person will be killed and you will have caused that to happen.

But if you do nothing, then five people will be killed.

What I would like you to do is to use the process in the table to show what a utilitarian would do.

Firstly, you will need to identify what options you have.

Secondly, you will need to predict the outcomes for each of these actions or options.

Thirdly, you will weigh the happiness against the pain.

And finally, you will choose the greatest good, which means the most happiness and least pain for the greatest number.

Remember what you're doing here is you are showing what a utilitarian would choose that might or might not be the same as what you would do.

Take some time to write down your answer.

You can use a flow chart or a table to show the process that you would have to work through.

Pause the video, then come back to me.

So let's have a look at what you could have said.

When you identified the options, you could have said that you could either pull the lever to divert the trolley or you could do nothing and let it continue on its path.

When you moved on to stage two and predicted the outcomes for each action, you could have said, if you did nothing, the trolley will hit and kill five people.

But if you pull the lever, it will switch tracks and kill one person instead.

When you moved on to think about weighing the happiness against the pain, you could have said, if you did nothing, five people would die causing large harm and sadness.

But if you pull the lever, harm is caused when one person dies, but happiness when five are saved.

Finally, you could have said that for a utilitarian, the choice will be to pull the lever because it would serve the greater good by saving more lives.

Well done if you managed to reach the conclusion that a utilitarian would pull the lever.

We looked earlier at how utilitarianism has a difficulty with calculating the greater good.

And this is because sometimes it's hard to work out, but also sometimes people disagree about which action produces the greater good.

In this example, Laura thinks helping her friends study rather than going to see a film with her family will produce the greater good.

But Lucas has used utilitarianism to come to a conclusion and he disagrees.

So he's calculated things differently.

I'd like you to use the sentence data to explain why Lucas thinks differently from Laura, even though he has also applied utilitarianism to the dilemma.

So why is his calculation different? Laura says, "If I help my friend, the outcome is that she will do better on her test, which will improve her future." Lucas says, "But if you go to see the film, this could produce the greater good because the outcome would be that.

." So your task is to finish Lucas's sentence and to suggest how going to see the film might produce the greater good, and to show why it's difficult to calculate.

Take some time to finish off Lucas's sentence, pause the video and come back to me.

Let's have a look at what you could have said.

You could have said, "If you go to see the film, this could produce the greater good because the outcome will be that it will strengthen your family bond, which will help you support each other in the future." Well done if you said something about how it might help Laura develop her relationship with her family.

In today's lesson on teleology and utilitarianism, we have learned that teleological ethics judges the rightness or wrongness of an action on its outcomes or consequences.

Jeremy Bentham introduced the teleological ethical theory of utilitarianism.

According to Bentham, an action is morally right if it creates the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

Utilitarianism can be criticised because of the difficulty of calculating which action will create the greatest good.

Thank you for your hard work today and well done.