RSS

Naive vs. so­phis­ti­cated consequentialism

TagLast edit: 31 Mar 2023 14:45 UTC by Pablo

Naive consequentialism is the view that, to comply with the requirements of consequentialism, an agent should at all times be motivated to perform the act that consequentialism requires. By contrast, sophisticated consequentialism holds that a consequentialist agent should adopt whichever set of motivations will, in fact, cause her to act in ways that consequentialism requires.

Terminology

Sometimes the terms “sophisticated consequentialism” and “naive consequentialism” are used to describe the contrast between applications of consequentialism that do and do not, respectively, consider less direct, less immediate, or otherwise less visible consequences into account.[1]

As a concrete example, a naive conception of consequentialism may lead an agent to believe that breaking certain commonsense moral rules is right if it seems that the immediate effects on the world will be net-positive. Such rule-breaking typically has negative side-effects, however—for instance, it can lower the degree of trust in society, and for the rule-breaker’s group specifically. Hence, sophisticated consequentialists tend to oppose rule-breaking more than naive consequentialists.

Further reading

Caviola, Lucius (2017) Against naive effective altruism, EAGx Berlin, November 20.

Ord, Toby (2009) Beyond Action: Applying Consequentialism to Decision Making and Motivation, Ph.D. thesis, University of Oxford.

Related entries

accidental harm | consequentialism | fanaticism | indirect long-term effects

  1. ^

    Cf. 80,000 Hours’ discussion of “simplistic” vs. “correct” replaceability in Todd, Benjamin (2015) ‘Replaceability’ isn’t as important as you might think (or we’ve suggested), 80,000 Hours, July 27.

Act util­i­tar­i­anism: crite­rion of right­ness vs. de­ci­sion procedure

Askell18 Jan 2017 23:49 UTC
59 points
5 comments4 min readEA link

Naïve vs Pru­dent Utilitarianism

Richard Y Chappell11 Nov 2022 23:53 UTC
97 points
42 comments5 min readEA link
(rychappell.substack.com)

Peace­ful­ness, non­vi­o­lence, and ex­pe­ri­en­tial­ist minimalism

Teo Ajantaival23 May 2022 19:17 UTC
61 points
14 comments28 min readEA link

In­tegrity for consequentialists

Paul_Christiano14 Nov 2016 20:56 UTC
169 points
18 comments8 min readEA link

Con­sid­er­ing Con­sid­er­ate­ness: Why com­mu­ni­ties of do-good­ers should be ex­cep­tion­ally considerate

Stefan_Schubert31 May 2017 22:41 UTC
58 points
15 comments1 min readEA link

Va­ri­eties of min­i­mal­ist moral views: Against ab­surd acts

Teo Ajantaival7 Nov 2023 11:57 UTC
50 points
3 comments11 min readEA link

Deon­tic Fictionalism

Richard Y Chappell17 Feb 2023 13:44 UTC
37 points
7 comments4 min readEA link
(rychappell.substack.com)

You Don’t Need To Jus­tify Everything

ThomasW12 Jun 2022 18:36 UTC
139 points
11 comments3 min readEA link

A per­sonal state­ment on FTX

William_MacAskill12 Nov 2022 16:40 UTC
286 points
144 comments2 min readEA link

SBF’s com­ments on ethics are no sur­prise to virtue ethicists

c.trout1 Dec 2022 4:21 UTC
10 points
31 comments16 min readEA link
(www.lesswrong.com)

Deon­tol­ogy and virtue ethics as “effec­tive the­o­ries” of con­se­quen­tial­ist ethics

Jan_Kulveit17 Nov 2022 9:20 UTC
55 points
11 comments10 min readEA link

Con­se­quen­tial­ists (in so­ciety) should self-mod­ify to have side con­straints

Jack R3 Aug 2022 22:47 UTC
71 points
12 comments3 min readEA link

Non-Con­se­quen­tial­ist Con­sid­er­a­tions For Cause-Pri­oritza­tion Part 2

Parker_Whitfill3 Dec 2018 0:41 UTC
9 points
1 comment11 min readEA link

Ste­fan Schu­bert: Naïve effec­tive al­tru­ism and the dan­ger of ne­glect­ing psychology

EA Global24 Oct 2020 19:56 UTC
7 points
0 comments1 min readEA link
(www.youtube.com)

Min­i­mal­ist ax­iolo­gies and pos­i­tive lives

Teo Ajantaival13 Nov 2021 10:57 UTC
54 points
12 comments25 min readEA link

Virtues for Real-World Utilitarians

Stefan_Schubert5 Aug 2021 22:56 UTC
152 points
7 comments1 min readEA link
(psyarxiv.com)

Deon­tol­ogy is not the solution

Peter McLaughlin16 Nov 2022 14:22 UTC
38 points
1 comment4 min readEA link

Con­se­quen­tial­ism does not en­dorse fraud­ing-to-give

Jasper Meyer7 Dec 2022 17:40 UTC
20 points
9 comments3 min readEA link