“Man can do what he wills, but he cannot will what he wills.” – Arthur Schopenhauer
If you believe that free will doesn’t exist, then you should certainly be a utilitarian.
There are strong arguments against free will, and I have a high degree of certainty that it doesn’t exist. My first blog post was about free will, and you can find it somewhere on Reductio Blogs. It’s in Malayalam, by the way.
One of the most popular counterexamples to utilitarianism relies on the assumption that some people deserve to suffer. Let me explain.
Imagine a serial killer who murdered thousands, but now the world has ended, and only he remains alive. We have two options: either punish him by inflicting suffering or give him a pleasurable life. Utilitarianism says we should give him a pleasurable life.
For many, this seems counterintuitive at first. But if you believe that free will doesn’t exist, you should also believe that his heinous actions were a result of his conditions (nature + nurture). His will to kill was shaped by factors beyond his control. Therefore, you should reject the idea of retributive punishment. Criminals are punished for three reasons:
- To prevent them from committing crimes again.
- To contain the criminal.
- To deter others from committing similar crimes.
Punishment helps prevent the formation of a will to murder—both in the criminal and in potential criminals.
Now, back to our scenario.
Punishing the serial killer in this case would not achieve any of these three goals. Therefore, there is no point in punishing him, which aligns with the utilitarian conclusion.
All evil people are evil due to factors beyond their control, and the same goes for good people being good. The utilitarian conclusion makes sense: suffering should only be inflicted if it results in greater overall utility, regardless of what someone has done in the past.
You don’t necessarily have to believe that free will doesn’t exists to be a utilitarian. Other ways of reflection will also leads you to utilitarianism.
Reductio 
Leave a comment