Money and Markets: Essays in Honor of Leland B. Yeager

210 Randall G. Holcombegenerally applicable abstract principles instead of on the fragmentary and probablyaccidentally biased bits of concrete information that one may happen topossess.(1985: 279)Yeager wants to go beyond rules-utilitarianism and advocates indirect utilitarianism,which includes aspects relating to individuals’ character and attitudes,but rules-utilitarianism is a subset of indirect utilitarianism, and that subset directlyapplies to issues of policy espousal discussed in the present paper. Yeager notes,Indirect utilitarianism encompasses and transcends a narrow focus on rules. . . .Indirect utilitarianism recommends, then, rules whose application is conditionedby suitable attitudes and inclinations and dispositions. Examples includesympathy (as of Adam Smith’s impartial spectator) and a sense of fairness, adisinclination to grab special privilege and to make arbitrary exceptions in one’sown favor. Having and acting on such dispositions is likely, by and large, to serveboth one’s own happiness and the general happiness . . .(2001: 88)Yeager recognizes the value of freedom, so is reluctant to push his utilitarianismtoward imposing rules on individuals. He says: “A utilitarian can recognize thatletting people make their own mistakes is more conducive to happiness, after all,than letting ‘the man in Whitehall’ direct their lives” (2001: 102). At the same time,he stops short of the contractarian position, noting “the factually dubious suppositionthat individuals are always the best judges of their own interests” (2001: 102),and goes on to note “actual happiness, not preference-satisfaction, remains themore philosophical criterion” (2001: 103). Economists often argue that individualsare the best judges of their own well-being, but Yeager does not accept this as auniversal truth.Yeager emphasizes the need for social cooperation to promote happiness, and,referring to public policy issues, says,the goal of any such tinkering should be to preserve and improve socialcooperation, which is a state of affairs allowing individuals in general . . .favorable opportunities to make good lives for themselves in their own diverseways through trade and other peaceful interactions with their fellows.(2001: 103)Yeager thus argues that social cooperation is the major goal of public policy, saying“social cooperation is only a nearly ultimate criterion” (2001: 82). Human happiness,of course, is his ultimate criterion.Yeager’s emphasis on social cooperation relates directly to his utilitarian policyespousal. He says,Since maximum utility, whether personal or aggregate, is not a goal that anyonecan directly pursue, the question facing ethical philosophers and policymakers