Utilitarianism is one a normative ethical philosophy, and it stands as one of the most important of its type. At its heart, utilitarianism is a consequentialist philosophy, in that the ethics of an action are dependent on the consequences of an action. Before the advent of utilitarianism, consequentialist philosophy emphasizes the self, in particular hedonism, but utilitarianism expanded the scope of consequences to include those to all society. Today, such scope has arguably been expanded further so that outcomes to the environment and other non-human entities is also taken into consideration (Driver, 2014). The most common distillation of utilitarian philosophy is in the phrase "the greatest good for the greatest number." Core Concept

If the morality of a decision rests on its consequences, that places significant onus on the decision-maker to consider the full range of those consequences. In early consequentialism, the consequences considered were largely to oneself, making it relatively easy to predict outcomes, but eschewing the idea that one has a duty of care to those with whom he or she shares the planet. Other philosophical schools of thought focus on what is right or moral, relying on the idea that there are universal laws which exist, and thus should not be violated. Decision-making is relatively easy in those schools when one knows those universal laws.

Utility and Freedom

One of the formative thinkers of utilitarianism was Herbert Spencer, and he was particularly concerned with the relationship between freedom and utility. The utilitarian viewpoint demands that the decision-maker consider the totality of consequences from his or her actions. A mental calculus must be conducted, therefore, weighing the likelihood of different outcomes, along with the ethical merits of those outcomes. For example, the executives at Enron felt that they could conduct their fraud and not get caught. It was entirely foreseeable that if they got caught, they would face legal action and the company would be destroyed. The consequences would be catastrophic. In their ethical calculus, they must have felt that a) the likelihood of getting caught was low, because the consequences were always going to be severe, including to themselves. Most people, when faced with the same opportunity, would have realized that...

Spencer sought to reconcile the relationship between utility and freedom (Weinstein, 2013). An example in business could be paying employees a living wage. In a labor market with full freedom, only the forces of supply and demand, and relative bargaining power, would affect wage levels. The result of this, however, because of differential bargaining power, is usually negative for a great many people. The benefits that accrue to some -- shareholders -- are largely outweighed by the fact that low wages leave people unable to escape poverty. Yet if companies are required to pay workers more, this infringes on the freedom of companies to bargain the price of labor in a free and competitive market.
Utilitarian ethics usually involves such trade-offs. Not every decision reflects a zero-sum game, but there is always an element of distribution of resources inherent in decision-making, and this creates at least partial trade-offs in many cases. Following a utilitarian view strictly may place someone in conflict between as to whose freedom is infringed upon in order to deliver the greatest good to the greatest number. Prisons illustrate this quite well -- someone's freedom has to be taken away entirely so that the rest of the public can be free from crime.

Response

Utilitarians are aware of this conflict within their philosophy, and indeed have engaged in debate about the subject. In general, minor conflicts are not regarded as needing serious, methodical consideration. Some bigger conflicts, however, do require a strict, rational approach. Carbon taxes are a good example of this. There are significant freedoms in our society, including the freedom to engage, en masse, in self-destructive behaviors. The problem is that a few can engage in self-destructive behaviors that ruin everything for the many. Humanity first encountered this issue at the dawn of the nuclear age, when the entire world could have seen nuclear holocaust. Today, climate change is a similar issue.…