The dangerous morality behind the 'Open it Up' movement

Nurses peacefully counter protested at a rally in Denver, Colorado, where hundreds gathered to demand that their state reopen

Posted: Apr 28, 2020 9:00 PM
Updated: Apr 28, 2020 9:00 PM

A healthcare worker in green scrubs stands in the middle of an intersection, staring down a traffic jam of screaming protesters demanding a return to their livelihoods and liberties.

The photograph, taken Sunday at an "Operation Gridlock" protest in Denver, so clearly captures the tensions of this American moment that it could be ripped from Norman Rockwell's collection. Like the protesters and the healthcare worker, our country is poised, tensely, at a moral crossroads.

A quandary now confronts policymakers across the country: Should we reopen the economy to help the majority or protect the lives of the vulnerable by remaining in lockdown?

One answer to that question -- letting a minority suffer so that the majority may benefit -- is known as utilitarianism. And it's one of the most common, and controversial, ways of making moral choices.

In matters of life and death, like we're in now, strict utilitarianism can be downright dangerous.

"This is a moment when every country in the world is facing the same set of ethical questions and dilemmas," said Anita Allen, a member of President Obama's bioethics committee.

"How we answer will be a real test of our humanity and sense of justice."

The moral calculations behind utilitarianism

The coronavirus pandemic has killed more than 45,000 Americans and put some 22 million out of work. On Tuesday alone, the US recorded 2,751 deaths. Most health experts say we are weeks, if not months, away from ending social-distancing restrictions.

But recently, many conservatives have sided with the "Open it Up" protesters. In the process, they've made some very unconservative arguments.

"There is no zero-harm choice here," Rep. Trey Hollingsworth of Indiana said recently, to take one example.

"We are going to have to look Americans in the eye and say 'we are making the best decision for the most Americans possible,' and the answer to that is to get Americans back to work."

Hollingsworth later walked back his comments, but he is not alone.

"There are things more important than living," Texas Lt. Gov Dan Patrick said on Tuesday. Last month Patrick suggested elderly Americans might be "willing to take a chance" on their survival for the country's economic health.

This kind of moral calculus reflects an unpleasant truth about utilitarianism.

"When undergrads are first introduced to utilitarianism, they're like, 'This is really cool. I am a Utilitarian,'" said Jim A.C. Everett, a moral psychologist in England.

"But then you walk them through the implications of the philosophy, and they say, 'Oh no no no.'"

Utilitarianism began as an equalizing force

Utilitarianism started as an equalizing force in utterly unequal 18th century England, challenging the idea that princes should be treated better than paupers.

Moral philosophers like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill argued that our well-being should matter equally, regardless of social status.

There are several variations of utilitarianism, but to put it simply, the idea is the morally correct choice is the one that produces "the greatest good for the greatest number." Other ethical considerations and responsibilities don't matter, not even natural rights, which Bentham called "nonsense on stilts."

The benefit of utilitarianism, said Everett, a professor of moral psychology at Kent University in England, is that it can expand our circle of caring. The philosophy asks us to set aside personal biases and think about the good of all.

Utilitarianism can also be extremely helpful for fairly allocating scarce resources among large groups of people, and so is used often by bioethicists and health care experts. Italy, a country rooted in Catholicism, has used a utilitarian model to decide which Covid-19 patients would get its limited number of ventilators.

Most of us apply some form of utilitarianism In our lives, when we try to weigh the consequences of our actions. When we donate money to a charity, for example, we often choose one we think will do the most good for the most people. And utilitarians often argue that the wealthy should give far more than they do.

Why some philosophers believe it should apply to the pandemic

Peter Singer, the world's most famous utilitarian philosopher, says we have moral imperative to end poverty.

In the case of the coronavirus pandemic, Singer argues that saving lives should be weighed against the harmful effects of the lockdown, not just on the economy but on people's health and well-being.

The Great Recession in 2008, for example, led to increases in suicide and deaths from preventable cancer, according to studies published in The Lancet, a leading medical journal.

"It pains us to say it," Singer wrote in a recent column with fellow moral philosopher Michael Plant, "but US President Donald Trump is right. We can't let the cure be worse than the disease."

Singer is a strange moral bedfellow for American conservatives. He's taken a sharp stance against the "sanctity of life," describing it as an idea fit for "know-nothing religious fundamentalists."

Why some believe it shouldn't

To be sure, not everyone arguing to reopen the economy is doing it because they embrace utilitarianism.

Quite a few anti-lockdown protesters have made libertarian arguments, waving yellow "Don't Tread on Me" flags and insisting on their rights as "sovereign citizens."

But both stances ignore important moral responsibilities, said Allen of Obama's bioethics committee, which produced detailed reports on topics like the ebola outbreak.

Allen, now a provost at the University's of Pennsylvania's law school, said the committee would have likely helped guide the Trump administration's response to the coronavirus pandemic.

But President Trump has apparently decided not to name one, breaking a presidential tradition that dates to Gerald Ford in the 1970s.

"There's a reason every president before Trump had a bioethics board," Allen said.

Echoing other bioethicists, Allen said utilitarianism can be helpful in drawing up public policy, especially when trying to estimate potential costs and benefits. But in a pandemic, the moral philosophy can lead to immoral actions, she said.

"There seems to be an implication that we can do a cost/benefit analysis about how many people we are willing to sacrifice in order to get the economy going."

Such a sacrifice won't be distributed equally. Studies have shown that Covid-19 disproportionately strikes minorities, the elderly and the poor.

For example, black workers comprise about 12% of the American labor force but make up a much larger percentage in "essential services," like grocery stores, public transit, the postal service and large retailers like Amazon.

Basic fairness, Allen said, requires that we consider the impact on their lives and the many other frontline workers who will risk contagion if and when the country is reopened.

"When you think about re-opening the economy, we are not just saying 'some people' will be sacrificed for the greater good," Allen said. "We are accepting that it will have a particularly hard impact on those communities."

Some think we don't know enough yet

To some extent, we are already making those trade-offs.

Curtailing our individual freedoms to "flatten the curve" of the novel coronavirus could be considered a massive experiment in utilitarianism, said Julian Savulescu, a philosopher and director of Oxford University's Center for Practical Ethics.

But for the most part, we don't know enough about this new virus to make a good utilitarian argument, Savulescu said.

For example, models that seek to predict the death toll from Covid-19 in the United States have been disconcertingly varied.

"The reality is that if you are in a state where the lockdown is relaxed, you might be better or worse off," Savulescu said.

"The only way utilitarianism works is in conjunction with scientific research."

A big problem with utilitarianism

One of the biggest problems with utilitarianism is the ease with which it treats individual lives as mere means for social ends.

Consider one famous thought experiment: Would you kill one healthy person to save the lives of five others who desperately need organ transplants?

Utilitarianism argues yes, for the greater good, the one should be killed for the five.

"It jars our common sense," said Savulescu. "People feel a tension and don't know how to resolve it."

Now the pandemic is forcing doctors, nurses and policy experts to face this thought experiment in real life.

"The question is staring us in the face," said the Oxford philosopher. "Every day is judgment day."

The idea of harming an innocent person, for any reason, abhors most of us, no matter our ethical stance.

For Trey Hollingsworth, the Indiana congressman, it's a centerpiece in his stance against abortion. In 2017, he denounced Roe. v. Wade, calling the lives of the unborn "gifts from God" and pledging to do all he can to "continue fighting for the sanctity of life."

The point here is not to play "gotcha." It's to expose the moral inconsistency in considering some lives worth fighting for, while abandoning others for the good of "most Americans."

If unborn life is sacred, then so is all life, including the lives made more vulnerable when we go back to work.

Minnesota Coronavirus Cases

Data is updated nightly.

Cases: 770246

Reported Deaths: 8661
CountyCasesDeaths
Hennepin1537491923
Ramsey63444980
Dakota57071526
Anoka54052520
Washington33690331
Stearns28419253
St. Louis23735361
Scott21652160
Wright21388171
Olmsted18144120
Sherburne15515115
Carver1366556
Clay1025399
Rice9985131
Blue Earth966659
Crow Wing9518109
Chisago837263
Kandiyohi835197
Otter Tail8061105
Benton7477111
Beltrami658079
Mower645541
Douglas629190
Goodhue619985
Itasca618885
Winona611854
McLeod595770
Steele585825
Isanti573074
Morrison557767
Becker534862
Polk512879
Freeborn487642
Nobles481652
Lyon456356
Carlton446866
Nicollet434454
Pine428532
Cass425745
Mille Lacs416967
Brown411547
Todd400036
Le Sueur386332
Meeker356854
Waseca327331
Martin326336
Wabasha29538
Hubbard292744
Dodge273510
Roseau265227
Fillmore243812
Redwood240443
Wadena238429
Houston231117
Renville228549
Faribault220630
Pennington217227
Sibley211612
Cottonwood197128
Kanabec192230
Chippewa190340
Aitkin184043
Watonwan171112
Pope16148
Yellow Medicine157220
Rock155319
Jackson147315
Koochiching138619
Clearwater136618
Murray135011
Swift134619
Marshall134520
Pipestone133427
Stevens124911
Lake109521
Wilkin102814
Lac qui Parle98524
Mahnomen90312
Norman8789
Big Stone7974
Grant7869
Lincoln7845
Kittson61122
Red Lake5899
Unassigned538124
Traverse5165
Lake of the Woods4764
Cook2460

Iowa Coronavirus Cases

Data is updated nightly.

Cases: 474151

Reported Deaths: 6785
CountyCasesDeaths
Polk74657729
Linn29194394
Scott24733274
Black Hawk20335358
Woodbury19207244
Johnson17988100
Dubuque15834229
Pottawattamie14276200
Dallas14109108
Story1288551
Warren774296
Cerro Gordo6951110
Webster6950111
Clinton6929101
Des Moines667594
Marshall641885
Muscatine6352113
Wapello5936137
Jasper578279
Lee565689
Sioux565676
Marion508191
Buena Vista491746
Plymouth463487
Henry389847
Jones370861
Washington366856
Benton359257
Bremer357168
Boone350937
Carroll346353
Crawford339347
Mahaska322856
Dickinson301052
Clay279133
Buchanan279039
Jackson273546
Kossuth271873
Hardin270249
Tama264976
Fayette260649
Delaware258546
Cedar249526
Page249328
Wright243645
Hamilton233954
Winneshiek233338
Floyd221845
Harrison217777
Madison216925
Clayton214558
Poweshiek211741
Iowa208029
Butler206638
Cass201557
Jefferson201040
Mills199929
Allamakee194753
Cherokee193844
Lyon192941
Hancock187639
Winnebago186633
Calhoun186116
Appanoose180850
Shelby178439
Louisa171052
Grundy168537
Humboldt167727
Emmet167146
Franklin164628
Mitchell164043
Union162637
Chickasaw159318
Sac157924
Guthrie155434
Montgomery142342
Palo Alto142032
Clarke141328
Keokuk139635
Monroe134335
Howard128222
Ida118641
Greene116315
Davis115225
Lucas113724
Pocahontas111423
Monona108738
Worth10818
Adair105335
Osceola94017
Fremont86111
Van Buren84221
Decatur82612
Taylor79713
Wayne74824
Ringgold67727
Audubon66814
Adams5095
Unassigned380
Rochester
Clear
36° wxIcon
Hi: 53° Lo: 35°
Feels Like: 36°
Mason City
Clear
34° wxIcon
Hi: 53° Lo: 35°
Feels Like: 26°
Albert Lea
Partly Cloudy
34° wxIcon
Hi: 53° Lo: 34°
Feels Like: 28°
Austin
Clear
° wxIcon
Hi: 53° Lo: 35°
Feels Like: °
Charles City
Clear
36° wxIcon
Hi: 53° Lo: 36°
Feels Like: 28°
Tracking mid-week rain
KIMT Radar
KIMT Eye in the sky

Latest Video

Image

Saving the great blue heron rookery in Olmsted County

Image

Garten Marketplatz hosts Save the Rookery environmental group

Image

Strike out polio

Image

Strike out polio

Image

Unleash the She

Image

Save the Rookery Heronfest

Image

Full Forecast 10/24/21

Image

Remembering Ted Benda

Image

Century girls' swim team makes it to true team state

Image

Creepy doll cocktail party

Community Events