Suffering-focused ethics are those views in

ethics Ethics is the philosophy, philosophical study of Morality, moral phenomena. Also called moral philosophy, it investigates Normativity, normative questions about what people ought to do or which behavior is morally right. Its main branches inclu ...

according to which reducing

suffering Suffering, or pain in a broad sense, may be an experience of unpleasantness or aversion, possibly associated with the perception of harm or threat of harm in an individual. Suffering is the basic element that makes up the negative valence (psyc ...

is either a key priority or our only aim. Those suffering-focused ethics according to which the reduction of suffering is a key priority are pluralistic views that include additional aims, such as the prevention of other disvaluable things like inequality, or the promotion of certain valuable things, such as pleasure. Nevertheless, these views still prioritize reducing preventable suffering over these other aims.

Different suffering-focused ethics

'Suffering-focused ethics' is an umbrella term that includes different normative positions sharing the common feature of giving priority to the reduction of suffering. One type of suffering-focused view is negative consequentialism. On this kind of view, we should act so that we bring about those situations in which there is less suffering. A particular type of negative consequentialist view is

negative utilitarianism Negative utilitarianism is a form of negative consequentialism that can be described as the view that people should minimize the total amount of aggregate suffering, or that they should minimize suffering and then, secondarily, maximize the tot ...

. According to this view, we should try to bring about situations containing smaller amounts of aggregate suffering, adding up everyone's suffering as having equal value (no matter whose such suffering is). Other suffering-focused ethics, however, differ significantly from suffering-focused consequentialist views. According to suffering-focused

deontological ethics In moral philosophy, deontological ethics or deontology (from Greek: and ) is the normative ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules and principles, ...

, the moral duty to reduce suffering is particularly relevant. For this reason, it will typically override other moral duties (although the duty to reduce suffering might be overriden by our other duties in certain cases). Moreover, this duty should be followed even if someone could bring about a better situation by violating it. Mayerfeld, J. (1999) ''Suffering and Moral Responsibility'', Oxford: Oxford University Press. Finally, there are suffering-focused ethics that focus on the moral character of an individual. On these views, the primary aim of a moral agent should consist in having a sound moral character. On certain suffering-focused character-based ethics, such a moral character will be that of the moral agent with the attitudes and dispositions of a virtuous suffering reducer. However, on other views of this kind it will be that of the moral agent with the attitudes and dispositions of a caring suffering reducer.

Suffering-focused ethics vs. negative ethics

Some suffering-focused views have historically been categorized as 'negative' in the philosophical literature. This nomenclature originated from the idea that these views prioritize the reduction of negative value over the promotion of positive value. While the term 'negative' continues to be widely used when referring to positions such as negative consequentialism and

, the use of the term 'suffering-focused ethics' has increased during the 21st century. One reason for this increase is that the term 'suffering-focused ethics' describes more accurately the commonalities between the wide range of different suffering-focused views that currently exist.

Relevance of suffering

Suffering-focused ethics can be differentiated in virtue of how much room they leave for promoting values that differ from the reduction of suffering. On some suffering-focused ethics, there is no room for positive values, given that only negative ones matter. In contrast, other views, such as tranquilist views, are compatible with the existence of positive values. However, on these views, positive values only have instrumental significance, that is, they are only good insofar as they prevent suffering. According to other suffering-focused positions called lexical views, no other values can matter more than reducing suffering (lexicality in theory of value is the idea that certain values trump others). These views, unlike the previous ones, are compatible with valuing positive things intrinsically. Nevertheless, on these views, reducing suffering should always take precedence over the promotion of these positive things. Finally, there are moderate suffering-focused views. According to these views, the reduction of suffering is more important than the promotion of other values and the reduction of other disvalues, although the promotion of these values and the reduction of these disvalues is also very important.

Arguments in favor of suffering-focused ethics

Some philosophers have endorsed suffering-focused views because they consider that these are the only views that can solve some problems in the field of

population ethics Population ethics is the philosophical study of the ethical problems arising when our actions affect ''who'' is born and ''how many'' people are born in the future. An important area within population ethics is population axiology, which is "the s ...

, such as the

asymmetry Asymmetry is the absence of, or a violation of, symmetry (the property of an object being invariant to a transformation, such as reflection). Symmetry is an important property of both physical and abstract systems and it may be displayed in pre ...

. According to this asymmetry, there is no obligation to bring into existence an individual who we can expect to have a good life, but there is an obligation not to bring into existence an individual who we can expect to have a bad life. It is possible to account for this asymmetry by accepting that there is an obligation to create happy lives, or by accepting that there is no obligation not to create unhappy lives. However, both options, especially the latter, are highly counterintuitive. Nevertheless, given that on suffering-focused ethics avoiding the creation of suffering has precedence over the promotion of happiness, these views can provide a very intuitive solution to this problem. Suffering-focused views also account for the idea that it is permissible not to benefit others but it is mandatory to avoid causing them to suffer. In particular, many believe that it would be wrong to cause an unknown individual to enjoy some pleasure by causing another one to undergo a suffering that is only slightly lower in intensity or duration. It is also argued that there is a qualitative asymmetry between happiness and suffering that warrants prioritizing suffering reduction: suffering is inherently urgent and in severe cases unbearably bad. In contrast, a neutral absence of pleasure or any other proposed intrinsic value does not constitute an urgent problem that needs to be immediately "relieved". Another argument in favor of prioritizing the reduction of suffering would be that suffering, including extreme suffering, is present in massive amounts in the world and can be easily reduced, while bliss and extreme pleasure are much more scarce and hard to cause. This view finds precedents in the positions held by Buddhists and by 19th century philosophers.

Arguments against the symmetry between suffering and happiness

Certain

normative Normativity is the phenomenon in human societies of designating some actions or outcomes as good, desirable, or permissible, and others as bad, undesirable, or impermissible. A Norm (philosophy), norm in this sense means a standard for evaluatin ...

views, such as

utilitarianism In ethical philosophy, utilitarianism is a family of normative ethical theories that prescribe actions that maximize happiness and well-being for the affected individuals. In other words, utilitarian ideas encourage actions that lead to the ...

, treat suffering and happiness as symmetrical—they hold that a given quantity of suffering can be fully compensated by an equal amount of happiness.

Karl Popper Sir Karl Raimund Popper (28 July 1902 – 17 September 1994) was an Austrian–British philosopher, academic and social commentator. One of the 20th century's most influential philosophers of science, Popper is known for his rejection of the ...

criticized this idea. He argued that

mistakenly assumes a continuous pleasure-pain scale, where degrees of pain can be offset by degrees of pleasure. From a moral perspective, he contended that pain cannot be outweighed by pleasure, particularly when one individual's suffering is balanced against another's happiness. This critique aligns with suffering-focused ethics by challenging the moral symmetry between happiness and suffering and reinforcing the idea that suffering reduction should take precedence over pleasure maximization. Similarly, German philosopher

Thomas Metzinger Thomas Metzinger (; born 12 March 1958) is a German philosopher and Professor Emeritus of theoretical philosophy at the University of Mainz. His primary research areas include philosophy of mind, philosophy of neuroscience, and applied ethics, ...

also calls into question the alleged symmetry between suffering and happiness. He argues that suffering has an "urgency of change," meaning it is intrinsically problematic and demands immediate attention. He contrasts this with the state of being neutral or untroubled, which, although it could be intensified into happiness, does not carry the same moral urgency as alleviating suffering. This view underscores an asymmetry between suffering and happiness, suggesting that one should prioritize addressing suffering over enhancing happiness from a neutral state.

Different suffering-focused ethics

Suffering-focused ethics vs. negative ethics

Relevance of suffering

Arguments in favor of suffering-focused ethics

Arguments against the symmetry between suffering and happiness

See also

References

Further reading

External links