|
Author: Sam Vaknin, Ph.D. Article source: http://samvak.tripod.com/. Used with author's permission.
Is there any necessary connection between our actions and the happiness of others? Disregarding for a moment the murkiness of the definitions of "actions" in philosophical literature - two types of answers were hitherto provided.
Sentient Beings (referred to, in this essay, as "Humans" or "persons") seem either to limit each other - or to enhance each other's actions. Mutual limitation is, for instance, evident in game theory. It deals with decision outcomes when all the rational "players" are fully aware of both the outcomes of their actions and of what they prefer these outcomes to be. They are also fully informed about the other players: they know that they are rational, too, for instance. This, of course, is a very farfetched idealization. A state of unbounded information is nowhere and never to be found. Still, in most cases, the players settle down to one of the Nash equilibria solutions. Their actions are constrained by the existence of the others.
The "Hidden Hand" of Adam Smith (which, among other things, benignly and optimally regulates the market and the price mechanisms) - is also a "mutually limiting" model. Numerous single participants strive to maximize their (economic and financial) outcomes - and end up merely optimizing them. The reason lies in the existence of others within the "market". Again, they are constrained by other people's motivations, priorities ands, above all, actions.
All the consequentialist theories of ethics deal with mutual enhancement. This is especially true of the Utilitarian variety. Acts (whether judged individually or in conformity to a set of rules) are moral, if their outcome increases utility (also known as happiness or pleasure). They are morally obligatory if they maximize utility and no alternative course of action can do so. Other versions talk about an "increase" in utility rather than its maximization. Still, the principle is simple: for an act to be judged "moral, ethical, virtuous, or good" - it must influence others in a way which will "enhance" and increase their happiness.
The flaws in all the above answers are evident and have been explored at length in the literature. The assumptions are dubious (fully informed participants, rationality in decision making and in prioritizing the outcomes, etc.). All the answers are instrumental and quantitative: they strive to offer a moral measuring rod. An "increase" entails the measurement of two states: before and after the act. Moreover, it demands full knowledge of the world and a type of knowledge so intimate, so private - that it is not even sure that the players themselves have conscious access to it. Who goes around equipped with an exhaustive list of his priorities and another list of all the possible outcomes of all the acts that he may commit?
But there is another, basic flaw: these answers are descriptive, observational, phenomenological in the restrictive sense of these words. The motives, the drives, the urges, the whole psychological landscape behind the act are deemed irrelevant. The only thing relevant is the increase in utility/happiness. If the latter is achieved - the former might as well not have existed. A computer, which increases happiness is morally equivalent to a person who achieves a quantitatively similar effect. Even worse: two persons acting out of different motives (one malicious and one benevolent) will be judged to be morally equivalent if their acts were to increase happiness similarly.
But, in life, an increase in utility or happiness or pleasure is CONDITIONED upon, is the RESULT of the motives behind the acts that led to it. Put differently: the utility functions of two acts depend decisively on the motivation, drive, or urge behind them. The process, which leads to the act is an inseparable part of the act and of its outcomes, including the outcomes in terms of the subsequent increase in utility or happiness. We can safely distinguish the "utility contaminated" act from the "utility pure (or ideal)" act.
If a person does something which is supposed to increase the overall utility - but does so in order to increase his own utility more than the expected average utility increase - the resulting increase will be lower. The maximum utility increase is achieved overall when the actor forgoes all increase in his personal utility. It seems that there is a constant of utility increase and a conservation law pertaining to it. So that a disproportionate increase in one's personal utility translates into a decrease in the overall average utility. It is not a zero sum game because of the infiniteness of the potential increase - but the rules of distribution of the utility added after the act, seem to dictate an averaging of the increase in order to maximize the result.
The same pitfalls await these observations as did the previous ones. The players must be in the possession of full information at least regarding the motivation of the other players. "Why is he doing this?" and "why did he do what he did?" are not questions confined to the criminal courts. We all want to understand the "why's" of actions long before we engage in utilitarian calculations of increased utility. This also seems to be the source of many an emotional reaction concerning human actions. We are envious because we think that the utility increase was unevenly divided (when adjusted for efforts invested and for the prevailing cultural mores). We suspect outcomes that are "too good to be true". Actually, this very sentence proves my point: that even if something produces an increase in overall happiness it will be considered morally dubious if the motivation behind it remains unclear or seems to be irrational or culturally deviant.
Two types of information are, therefore, always needed: one (discussed above) concerns the motives of the main protagonists, the act-ors. The second type relates to the world. Full knowledge about the world is also a necessity: the causal chains (actions lead to outcomes), what increases the overall utility or happiness and for whom, etc. To assume that all the participants in an interaction possess this tremendous amount of information is an idealization (used also in modern theories of economy), should be regarded as such and not be confused with reality in which people approximate, estimate, extrapolate and evaluate based on a much more limited knowledge.
Two examples come to mind:
Aristotle described the "Great Soul". It is a virtuous agent (actor, player) that judges himself to be possessed of a great soul (in a self-referential evaluative disposition). He has the right measure of his worth and he courts the appreciation of his peers (but not of his inferiors) which he believes that he deserves by virtue of being virtuous. He has a dignity of demeanour, which is also very self-conscious. He is, in short, magnanimous (for instance, he forgives his enemies their offences). He seems to be the classical case of a happiness-increasing agent - but he is not. And the reason that he fails in qualifying as such is that his motives are suspect. Does he refrain from assaulting his enemies because of charity and generosity of spirit - or because it is likely to dent his pomposity? It is sufficient that a POSSIBLE different motive exist - to ruin the utilitarian outcome.
Adam Smith, on the other hand, adopted the spectator theory of his teacher Francis Hutcheson. The morally good is a euphemism. It is really the name provided to the pleasure, which a spectator derives from seeing a virtue in action. Smith added that the reason for this emotion is the similarity between the virtue observed in the agent and the virtue possessed by the observer. It is of a moral nature because of the object involved: the agent tries to consciously conform to standards of behaviour which will not harm the innocent, while, simultaneously benefiting himself, his family and his friends. This, in turn, will benefit society as a whole. Such a person is likely to be grateful to his benefactors and sustain the chain of virtue by reciprocating. The chain of good will, thus, endlessly multiply.
Even here, we see that the question of motive and psychology is of utmost importance. WHY is the agent doing what he is doing? Does he really conform to society's standards INTERNALLY? Is he GRATEFUL to his benefactors? Does he WISH to benefit his friends? These are all questions answerable only in the realm of the mind. Really, they are not answerable at all. About The Author
Sam Vaknin is the author of "Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited" and the editor of mental health categories in The Open Directory, Suite101, and searcheurope.com.
His web site: http://samvak.tripod.com
Frequently asked questions regarding narcissism: http://samvak.tripod.com/faq1.html
Narcissistic Personality Disorder on Suite101: http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/npd
How to Write News Releases that Get Noticed
Easy tips for writing releases that get picked up rather than thrown out.
What is the Most Difficult Part of an Improvement Program?
Most of us realize that there is probably a better way to perform certain functions or tasks, but improvement programs seem to take second seat to getting the p...
The Digicams Of Generation Y: A Photo-enthusiasts Paradise!
Discover the incredible potentials of the Digicams of gen-Y, which have reawakened the photo-enthusiasts' love of photography by capturing the beauty of any mom...
Fun & Unique Baby Shower Favors
A baby shower is often the highlight of an expectant mother's pregnancy. Planning a baby shower requires some thought and consideration for the expectant mother...
Sexual Relationships in Space Colonies
Many behavioral scientists believe that interpersonal relationships amongst astronauts will be a problematic situation and could very well effect the over all m...
Are Condo Hotels What the Orlando Real Estate Investor Has Been Looking For?
With house prices in Orlando increasing faster than rental rates, investors have been looking for opportunities that make that elusive breakeven point obtainabl...
Buying A Cell Phone – Making Smart Choices
Buying tips and helpful advice on shopping for your next cell phone or plan.
Build Your Inbound Site Links Without Requesting Reciprocal Links
Professional Internet marketers have been publishing and distributing free self-written articles to drive traffic to their websites for several years. Yet mos...
The MLM Revolving Door Syndrome
Most people who try network marketing flounder around for months, or even years, like a fish out of water, and never really discover how to make network marketi...
An Immortal Horse
If this scenario has any credence it seems likely that the Chinese or Asian/Mu people were involved in Aztlan at this time and before as well. I can find no spe...
Dating Dilemma: The Man Who Said Hed Call and Didnt
Every woman in the United States of America has gone out with a guy who's pulled this stunt. Here's what you can do if it happens to you.
Growing Your Network of People Can be Easy and Fun!
Networking can be a lot of work if you let it. But if you view it as a game and see what you can do in a very short amount of time, you'll be surprised what you...
Dont Let Rattlesnakes Scare You
Article discusses how we can blow fears unnecessarily out of proportion, such as the common fear of cold calling.
Diversity in the Workplace
As you look around your office, is everyone just like you? Probably not. The demographics of the American workforce have changed dramatically over the last 50 y...
7 Things You Can Do Immediately To Ease Depression
1. Get out now and walk fifteen minutes. It will get your feet moving and help you feel you are at least able to do something.
Wedding Save the Date Cards—Best Ideas and Wording
What you need to know and things you should avoid...
How to Maximize Goals, Affirmations and Visualizations
By paying attention to your thoughts and feelings while practicing techniques such as goal setting, affirmations and visualizations, you can achieve exciting re...
Atlantic City Casino Resort
Atlantic City Casino is an exciting gambling entertainment alternative to the Las Vegas resorts. An interesting game called Pai Gow can be played there.
The Causes Of Stuttering In Childhood
Stuttering information about where people might stutter and where they go to seek help.
Insurance and The Engineer
The world is no longer right when the two words, Engineer and Insurance are used together, side by side in a conversation. Individually they are words that just...
The Home Garden
The garden should be near the house and away from trees. If it's some distance away from the house, it will not be as well looked after, nor will most use be ma...
How to Cause a Stampede of Traffic to Your Website
Start an e-zine for your web site. When people read each issue they'll be reminded to revisit your web site. They'll see your product ad more than
just once whi...
Achieving Your Goals by Using One Word
This article concentrates on one well known key word which can totally change your attitude towards finishing what you have started. It will help you complete y...
Leading With A Chip On Your Shoulder
A common characteristic of many leaders is to use anger in getting people to do things. The author calls it "leading with a chip on your shoulder", and he show...
|
Print this page