This month we’ve been looking outside of Christianity to the field of moral philosophy in an attempt to carve out our own system of morality. Since “because God says so” is no basis for a system of morality, and shame is socially conditioned, it’s useful to examine our beliefs about ethics and decide what stays and what goes.
But let’s face it, philosophy books do not make for riveting reading. There’s a steep learning curve and confusing language. (What even is the categorical imperative?) That’s where Michael Schur comes in. His show The Good Place aims to make these questions around right and wrong entertaining. The four-season show revolved around Eleanor, who wakes up in heaven, only to realize there’s been a huge mistake—she isn’t supposed to be there. Along with her so-called soulmate, Chidi, and friends Tahani and Jason, Eleanor tries to learn how to become a better person in hopes of escaping hell. This joke-dense, twisty ride was one of my favorite shows of the last decade.
But for true nerds who didn’t get enough philosophy from The Good Place, Schur wrote How to Be Perfect: The Correct Answer to Every Moral Question. He opens the book with the question, “Is it wrong to punch your friend in the face for no reason?” Then asks, “How do you know?” From there it’s a tour from Aristotle to Peter Singer, with pit stops to snark on Nietzsche and Ayn Rand.
Both show and book are fun overviews of the history of how humans look at moral questions. One of their most successful critiques is of utilitarianism. This philosophy has been kicked around for the last 200 or so years, showing up lately as Effective Altruism.
Tl;dr: utilitarianism asks two questions: “what are the consequences of a given action?” And “which of these actions will make the most people happy?” Later variants look at suffering, both in quantity and depth. Trickiness ensues!
The most famous thought experiment from utilitarianism is The Trolley Problem. Per Wikipedia:
“There is a runaway trolley barreling down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up and unable to move. The trolley is headed straight for them. You are standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever. If you pull this lever, the trolley will switch to a different set of tracks. However, you notice that there is one person on the side track. You have two (and only two) options:
1.Do nothing, in which case the trolley will kill the five people on the main track. 2.Pull the lever, diverting the trolley onto the side track where it will kill one person.
Which is the more ethical option? Or, more simply: What is the right thing to do?”
While it makes sense on a surface level that we want to make choices that maximize happiness and minimize suffering for the greatest number of people, once we get into the minutiae, things are never as cut-and-dry as they appear. Think of blood sport—does the suffering of one person matter more if that suffering is greater than the happiness experienced by the many? Or, as Doug Forcett learned in The Good Place season 3, episode 8, if you follow utilitarianism to its logical conclusion, you can become a “happiness pump”—someone who leads a life of suffering for the marginal gain of others.
The thing about thought experiments is that just when you’ve settled on a right course of action, a tweak to the problem can produce another moral quandary. This is either fun or exasperating, depending on your tolerance for philosophy. But while Michael Schur’s oeuvre can’t actually give us the correct answer to every moral question, it’s a great starting point for thinking through these problems.
Journal/Discussion Questions:
Have you watched The Good Place? What did you learn from it?
Would you flip the switch in the trolley problem? Why/why not?
Who would you rather be stuck in an elevator with: a professor of moral philosophy or a screaming toddler?
The Good Place is currently streaming on Netflix. An episode with an overview of several major moral philosophies is season 3, episode 4, though if you start there you will miss a lot of juicy storyline.