Repugnant Conclusion

Definition

The repugnant conclusion is a philosophical notion in utilitarianism that suggests if a large population of people living barely bearable lives can be considered better than a smaller population living very happy lives, then it challenges our intuitions about well-being and value. This idea brings to light the potential implications of utilitarian thought, questioning how happiness and suffering should be weighed when making ethical decisions. The conclusion leads to debates around the moral acceptability of maximizing overall happiness at the cost of individual suffering.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The repugnant conclusion was notably discussed by philosopher Derek Parfit in his work on population ethics.
2. This conclusion raises significant questions about how we value different levels of happiness and the quality of life versus sheer quantity of people.
3. It suggests that from a purely utilitarian perspective, it might be justifiable to have many individuals live marginally acceptable lives instead of fewer individuals living fulfilling lives.
4. The concept often leads to discussions on how societal choices impact future generations and their happiness.
5. Critics of the repugnant conclusion argue that it contradicts our intuitive moral beliefs about the quality of life being paramount over mere numbers.

Review Questions

• How does the repugnant conclusion challenge traditional views on well-being and population size?
  • The repugnant conclusion challenges traditional views by suggesting that a larger population living only barely acceptable lives could be seen as better than a smaller population enjoying high levels of happiness. This notion contradicts the common intuition that quality of life should take precedence over quantity. It forces us to rethink how we prioritize happiness and whether maximizing total utility can lead to morally questionable outcomes.
• In what ways does the repugnant conclusion contribute to debates within population ethics?
  • The repugnant conclusion fuels debates in population ethics by highlighting the tension between the number of people and their quality of life. It presents a dilemma for utilitarian frameworks, raising questions about whether we should focus on increasing population size if it leads to more individuals experiencing lesser forms of happiness. This prompts discussions around policies affecting population growth, resource allocation, and long-term implications for societal well-being.
• Evaluate the implications of accepting the repugnant conclusion for utilitarian ethical theory and societal decision-making.
  • Accepting the repugnant conclusion has significant implications for utilitarian ethical theory, as it suggests that policies aimed at maximizing total happiness may inadvertently endorse conditions where many suffer minimally rather than ensuring higher quality lives for fewer individuals. This acceptance can lead to troubling societal decision-making, where choices might prioritize sheer numbers over improving individual well-being. It necessitates a reconsideration of how we measure happiness and the moral weight we give to different life experiences in our ethical evaluations.

Related terms

Utilitarianism:

An ethical theory that advocates for actions that maximize overall happiness or utility.

Population Ethics: A branch of ethics that examines the moral implications of population size and its impact on well-being.

Total Utilitarianism: A form of utilitarianism that evaluates the total happiness produced by a population, regardless of individual experiences.