Utilitarianism and the Idea of University. A Short Ethical Analysis

Abstract

The standard objection to the utilitarian vision of morality is that utilitarian so-called “Greatest-Happiness Principle” could justify counter-intuitive practices such as punishing and sacrifice of innocents, breaking of promises and manipulation. The underlying presumption is that the greatest cause (general utility, “happiness”) must be capable of justifying causing suffering of the few. The fact is that, in the upbringing and education of humans (children), some degree of manipulation is needed. Instead, in that process, we use concepts which belong to deontological prescriptions (“obligations,” “duties”) such as “Do not lie” or “Do not steal.” Our question is: Can we imagine the University guided by the simple utility principle. We must remember that a University is for adults, not for children. Why now not be open and at the University say that everything we do we do for the sake of hedonistic “happiness,” not for the sake of duty. That seems suspicious for several reasons. Maybe the most noteworthy objection is that Mill’s version of the utilitarianism tends to divide humanity into two classes: moral aristocracy, which seeks “higher pleasures,” and others who do not. Does that mean that utilitarians must organize secret utilitarian universities for moral aristocracy? Does it mean that moral aristocracy, according to the utility principle, should organize “deontological,” manipulative public universities for lower classes?

Standarni prigovor utilitarnoj viziji moralnosti jeste da tzv. „princip najveće sreće” može da opravda kontraintuitivne prakse kao što su kažnjavanje i žrtvovanje nevinih, kršenje obećanja i manipulaciju. Osnovna pretpostavka je da najveći razlog (opšta korisnost, „sreća”) mora biti sposoban opravdati uzrokovanje patnje nekolicine. Činjenica je da u okviru podizanja i obrazovanja ljudi (dece), neki nivo manipulacije jeste potreban. Umesto toga, u tom procesu mi koristimo pojmove koji pripadaju deontološkim propisima („obaveze”, „dužnosti”) kao što su „Ne laži” ili „Ne kradi”. Naše pitanje je: možemo li zamisliti Univerzitet vođen jednostavnim principom korisnosti. Moramo zapamtiti da je Univerzitet za odrasle, ne za decu. Zašto se sada ne otvori i na Univerzitetu ne kaže da sve što radimo radimo zarad hedonističke „sreće“, a ne zarad dužnosti. To se čini sumnjivim iz nekoliko razloga. Možda prigovor najvredniji pažnje jeste da Milova verzija utilitarizma nastoji da podeli čovečanstvo u dve klase: moralnu aristokratiju, koja traži „viša uživanja“, i druge koji to ne traže. Da li to znači da utilitarci moraju da organizuju tajne utilitarijanske univerzitete za moralnu aristokratiju? Da li to znači bi da moralna aristokratija, prema principu korisnosti, trebalo da organizuje „deontološke“, manipulatavine javne univerzitete za niže klase?