Philosophical Currents: Utilitarianism to Habermas
Utilitarianism
Identify happiness with pleasure. The difference is that it is not considered in an individualistic way, as hedonists understood it. It follows the principle of “The greatest happiness for the greatest number”, i.e., an action will be better the more happiness it produces for the greatest number of people possible.
J. Bentham (1748-1832)
For him, nature has given us two great masters: pleasure and pain, that show us what is good or bad for us. He proposed an “Arithmetic of Pleasures”, which consists of calculating the pleasure and pain that might result from an action and always choosing the positive outcome. Bentham was concerned about political and social issues. The consequences of an action are those which determine whether it is good or bad (as opposed to Kantian ethics).
J. S. Mill (1806-1873)
Quality is better than quantity. The greatest virtue of utilitarian morality is altruism, which involves sacrificing one’s pleasure for the sake of others. Through education, we can achieve the common good.
Marxism
Karl Marx (1818-1883). It is similar to utilitarianism: I cannot be happy if I live surrounded by unhappy people.
- The first is to ensure that all people have the minimum material conditions of existence. It is not ethical to promote novelty; first, it is necessary to improve the material living conditions of the population. This is the first term of Marxist ethics: to rebel against the exploitation of man by man.
- The morally good is to participate in politics and fight for a better future.
- They preach the importance of commitment; one must not isolate oneself.
Marxists argue that the only way to improve social conditions is through social revolution. The need for liberation:
- Political (vs. State)
- Economic (against capitalism)
- Religion. “Religion is the opium of the people”
The ultimate goal is to achieve a Communist society where there are no class differences and no private property. “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.” “WORKERS OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE!”
F. Nietzsche
(He would never support Nazism). A philosopher who lived during the late 19th century. His work unmasks precedent morals. He does not see differences between different moral systems; all preach the same values. The values of the Jewish religion. All values of the Christian religion denote a fear of life. If life is joy and gladness, let’s face it, but if it is suffering and violence, so be it. There is nothing beyond life. He intends to return to archaic, primitive values. We must avoid resentment, guilt, and bad conscience, values contrary to life. He is against the Church*.
Existentialism and Sartre
It is a philosophical current that appeared in Europe in the interwar period. Sartre gave as its starting point the loss of religious faith. God is dead, and we no longer have similar ideas and absolute values. Everything depends on us; we are condemned to be free. We must choose the type of person we want to be; there is no better or worse, we create values. We have made the kind of person that we have become; each model is our own. Recommendation: we must engage.
Wittgenstein and Analytic Philosophy
The key is language. Most problems arise because we do not assign a clear and precise solution to words. Only problems that can be posed in accurate terms have solutions, and this is not the case with ethical problems, which for analytical philosophers become pseudo-problems.
Habermas and Dialogical Ethics
Dialogical ethics is an ethics that starts with dialogue. Dialogical ethics says that what you have to do is introduce to others the reasons why you think that way so that they can also objectively assess. The objective of dialogue is to achieve the common good; we must begin a dialogue under the commitment that we will respect the final result of the dialogue.