A public utility plans to run high-tension lines
next to a college containing a number of important works of architecture. The
power poles and wires would also obstruct the distant view of a main building
on campus, which the architect purposefully designed to be seen as people
approached from afar. The utility claims that that location had the lowest
cost, and the college has taken the utility to court to stop the installation
of the power lines there.
We often think of a
utility in terms of the publically regulated companies that provide us with the
water, heat, and power we use in our daily lives. But the word “utility” has a
different meaning in ethics, and understanding that difference can help resolve
this dispute. Ethically, utility means the usefulness of an action, and it
leads us to ask, of any situation: did it produce good consequences or bad, and
if so, for whom and how many? Utilitarianism, one of the dominant modes of
modern ethics, has “utility” as its root word, and it can prove useful in
sorting out conflicts like this one.
Among the various types of
utilitarianism, the distinction between hedonistic and ideal utility might shed
the most light here. Hedonistic utilitarians judge the consequences of an action
according to the pleasure it brings or the pain it avoids. In the case of this
power utility that wants to route its lines in the most cost-effective way, the
reduced expense to the company and presumably the reduced rate increases to
customers that result from it, produces the most pleasure, if measured
economically.
Ideal utilitarians see
things differently. They argue that we determine something to be good or bad
for reasons that transcend simply pleasure or pain. A good consequence for an
ideal utilitarian would factor in intellectual, aesthetic, or even spiritual
values, and not just those related to physical pleasure or economic profit.
That distinction has obvious relevance to current political debates. Those who
would willingly cut government spending on what they see as extraneous
activities in order to keep taxes as low as possible clearly fall into the
hedonistic camp, even though such “conservatives” might not like being branded
as hedonists. Meanwhile, those who willingly pay more taxes in order to support
public benefits such as parks, schools, and arts and cultural organizations
just as clearly fall into the idealist camp, a description that might also rub
some “liberals” the wrong way.
In the situation here, the
power company has made a hedonistic argument: run the power lines along the
lowest-cost route to keep ratepayers’ increases down. Meanwhile, the college
has made an idealist one: the aesthetic value of its buildings makes their
visual disruption by power lines an unacceptable consequence. These two
positions may seem irreconcilable, but not so, according to the 19th
century philosopher, John Stuart Mill. He argued for a middle ground, that
while pleasure matters to people, there are higher and lower pleasures. The
pleasures of the body and the profits of marketplace, for example, remain of
lower quality than the pleasures of the mind and profits of cultural
activities, which Mill saw as having a more enduring and ultimately more
satisfying nature.
To the hardheaded CEO or a
hard-hearted conservative, such sentiments may seem cloying. When the bottom
line becomes the primary determinant of all value, intellectual, aesthetic, and
spiritual values have little to do with the utility of an action. But ideal
utilitarians and those who accept Mill’s middle ground have a compelling case
here. The slightly increased cost of re-routing the power lines cannot compare
to the irreparable damage to the college’s campus or the visual disruption of
peoples approach to it that the intended location of the power lines would
cause. The rate increase that might come as a result of routing the lines would
affect only the ratepayers and only once; meanwhile, the impact of the proposed
route would affect the college’s faculty, staff, students, and visitors for a
very long time. Based on the simple utilitarian calculus of what brings the
greatest good to the greatest number, apart from one’s hedonistic and
idealistic leanings, there is no question that the greatest utility stems from
the utility moving its lines and respecting the approach and aura of the
campus.
No comments:
Post a Comment