(Click here to continue on the main path)

I know there are a lot of objections to utilitarianism, but I'm not quite ready to throw it out completely. There are basic intuitions embodied in utilitarianism that we shouldn't disregard. Don't throw out the baby with the bath.

As Will Kymlicka points out, utilitarianism has a number of attractive features. First of all, it doesn't require belief in God. That doesn't matter to me since I am proud to say that my ethics are based on my religious faith. But for you secular folks, it is crucial to develop an ethical theory that doesn't require a theological basis. Second, utilitarianism stresses the importance of human welfare. Third, it requires impartiality between people. Bentham stressed that everyone's happiness was to count equally. And fourth, it ties moral judgments to consequences.

All of these are features that most of us value. So I would suggest to you that rather than throw out utilitarianism, you think about how it might be modified to meet the objections you have made to it. Ronald Dworkin proposed that utilitarian calculations should exclude certain kinds of preferences that he called "external" preferences. Others have suggested that utilitarianism be supplemented by a theory of fair shares that will prevent the exploitation of some for the benefit of others.

You might look at Will Kymlicka's discussion of utilitarianism in his book Contemporary Political Theory.