Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 12
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Smuts, Aaron 2014. Suffering Art Gladly.

    Smuts, Aaron 2013. The Good Cause Account of the Meaning of Life. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 51, Issue. 4, p. 536.

    Taylor, A. P. 2013. The frustrating problem for four-dimensionalism. Philosophical Studies, Vol. 165, Issue. 3, p. 1097.

    HEATHWOOD, CHRIS 2011. PREFERENTISM AND SELF-SACRIFICE. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 92, Issue. 1, p. 18.

    Baujard, Antoinette 2010. Collective interest versus individual interest in Bentham'sfelicific calculus. Questioning welfarism and fairness. The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Vol. 17, Issue. 4, p. 607.

    Endola, Joseph 2006. Intuitive Hedonism. Philosophical Studies, Vol. 128, Issue. 2, p. 441.

    Tarrant, James 2001. The Ethics of Post-compulsory Education and Training in a Democracy. Journal of Further and Higher Education, Vol. 25, Issue. 3, p. 369.

    Yuengert, Andrew M. 2001. Rational Choice with Passion: Virtue in a Model of Rational Addiction. Review of Social Economy, Vol. 59, Issue. 1, p. 1.

    Johansson-Stenman, Olof 1998. On the problematic link between fundamental ethics and economic policy recommendations. Journal of Economic Methodology, Vol. 5, Issue. 2, p. 263.

    Cohen, Joshua 1995. Samuelson's operationalist-descriptivist thesis. Journal of Economic Methodology, Vol. 2, Issue. 1, p. 53.

    Kangas, Jyrki 1995. Supporting the choice of the sports fishing site. Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 43, Issue. 3, p. 219.

    Cowen, Tyler 1993. The Scope and Limits of Preference Sovereignty. Economics and Philosophy, Vol. 9, Issue. 02, p. 253.


What is Utility?

  • D. W. Haslett (a1)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 December 2008

Social scientists could learn some useful things from philosophy. Here I shall discuss what I take to be one such thing: a better understanding of the concept of utility. There are several reasons why a better understanding may be useful. First, this concept is commonly found in the writings of social scientists, especially economists (see, for example, Sen and Williams, 1982). Second, utility is the main ingredient in utilitarianism, a perspective on morality that, traditionally, has been very influential among social scientists. Third, and most important, with a better understanding of utility comes, as I shall try to show here, a better understanding of “personal welfare”. or, in other words, of what may be said to be in people's best interests. Such an understanding is useful to social scientists and philosophers alike, whether for utilitarian purposes or not.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

R. M. Hare 1981. Moral Thinking: Its Levels, Method and Point. Oxford: Clarendon.

David W. Pearce (editor). 1986. The MIT Dictionary of Modern Economics, 3rd ed.Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Joan Robinson . 1962. Economic Philosophy. Chicago: Aldine.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Economics & Philosophy
  • ISSN: 0266-2671
  • EISSN: 1474-0028
  • URL: /core/journals/economics-and-philosophy
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *