Choices Chapter Five: Consider the Consequences, Part 1 

Posted by Melissa Davis 

According to Smedes we should make choices by 1. following the rules, and 2. considering the consequences. Having exposited on the rules in chapter 4, he now turns his attention to the consequences.

 

Smedes seems to hold to a view of utilitarianism—the belief that right and wrong are determined by outcomes: right things have good outcomes, while wrong things have bad outcomes (Smedes 67). Smedes, then, claims that for something to be morally right, it must add to the goodness of peoples’ lives. He does include an important caveat: we know that some things are so terrible that even if they lead to good, they cannot be considered good. In short, the ends don’t justify the means.

 

Having established this understanding of morally right, Smedes says that to know which consequences are good, we must consider four questions which I will rephrase here:

1. What is good for people?

2. Are some goods better than others, and if so, which?

3. Who gets the good consequences?

4. When should people get good results—now or later?

In what follows, I will briefly consider Smedes’ exploration of these four questions and then offer my own reflection.

 

What is good?

There are three types of goods. An intrinsic good is good for its own sake. Smedes focuses here only on happiness, which he says results from possessing some favorable combination of health, love, freedom, peace, truth, beauty, character, gratitude, and experience of God (73). In considering our choices, if the choice brings greater happiness for people, it’s probably right.

 

Secondly, there are instrumental goods. These are useful: money enables us to buy things, knowledge makes the world a better place (77). Of course, we can misuse these things in ways that are not good, but they are meant to serve a good end. Unlike with intrinsic goods, helping people acquire instrumental goods is not a proof that our choice is right. We must consider: do they need this good? will they use it well?

 

Finally, there are moral goods (virtues)—they make us better people (78). These include courage, compassion, fairness, loyalty, and discernment. Virtues are desirable, in Smedes’ view, because virtuous people make life better for others. Therefore, if a choice helps others become more virtuous, it’s probably the right choice.

 

Are some goods better than others?

There are goods we need, and goods we want. Goods we need fall into three categories: survival needs, growth needs, and freedom needs. We not only need to survive physically, but “we need to become more of what we are” (82) (growth needs), and we also need freedom from intrusion and unfair constraint, and freedom to do what we think is right (freedom needs). A choice is likely right if it lets people keep or helps people get what they really need.

 

Our choices are less clear-cut if we’re thinking about what people desire. There are good things we want that we also need. A choice that gets a good thing for someone who wants it and needs it is probably a right choice. Then there are good things we want that we don’t really need. If our choice secures this for someone, it might be right. Might it be right to give your child another cracker at snack time? Maybe, if it won’t spoil their dinner and they will in fact eat it. Then there are those things people want that are bad things which hurt people. It is, of course, wrong to meet these desires.

Tune in next week for the second half of chapter five.