Williams Criticism Of Utilitarianism

4 Pages 999 Words

Bernard Williams puts forth some efficient arguments against utilitarianism that beg the question whether or not utilitarian values accurately depict the way in which it is inherent that we act. His critique of the utilitarian doctrine of negative responsibility requires further repudiation than Williams gives in his argument to be convincing. However, the weakest part of Williams’ analysis is within his crucial argument in regards to integrity, which is an unpersuasive element within his thesis.
One of Williams’ criticisms is based on the problem that utilitarianism makes choices that are difficult, in which it is not obvious what the morally right thing to do is, seem too easy. Bernard Williams' example of Jim is illustrates this: Jim has a choice between shooting one man and having the others go free, or doing nothing, in which case all the men will be killed. Bernard Williams views utilitarianism as problematic in response to “what sort of considerations come into finding the answer.” For Williams, it doesn't seem obvious what the right thing to do is; however, from a utilitarian perspective, it would be obvious. A utilitarian would respond to this Williams’ scenario by saying that it is obvious that the right thing to do is to shoot the one man in order to save the others. Jim's difficulty in deciding is embedded by his squeamishness at the thought of killing someone, which would be completely self-indulgent from a utilitarian stance.
This example of Jim also leads into Williams’ argument against negative responsibility. Williams states that
“A feature of utilitarianism is that it cuts out a kind of consideration which for some others makes a difference to what they feel about some cases: a consideration involving the idea, as we might first and very simply put it, that each of us is responsible for what he does, rather than for what other people do.”
In other words, from a utilitarian perspective, Jim would...