Utilitarianism EssayUtilitarianism

Essay on Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is mainly associated with the principle of Utility summarised by
Jeremy Bentham, a social reformer, in 1768. This principle was to apply 'the greatest good of the
greatest number' theory to all situations that may arise. This theory was that which is good is the act
which provides the greatest amount of pleasure and the least amount of pain. This is a teleological
theory as the action is determined by the consequences of the action, and not the purpose of the
action. The theory considered pleasure and happiness to be the...show more content...
For Bentham an act is only good if it leads to pleasure. John Stuart Mill was the son of a
philosopher who worked with Jeremy Bentham. However, Mill thought that Bentham's idea of
pleasure was vague and thought that different forms of pleasure had different values. Certain
areas of Bentham's theory proved to be problematic when trying to apply it to real life situations.
The common example of this is supposing you were a doctor driving to give a patient an
emergency Caesarian section, but you see an old man and the woman's husband in a car crash
together. With all four lives in a fatal state, following the theory is impossible as people would
respond differently as well as not having the time to consider all the options. Mill recognised that it
was within human nature for a person not to try for the maximum pleasure, but for a closer pleasure
instead, and developed Bentham's theory. Bentham's theory states that an action that will produce
the most happiness is the justified decision, using the hedonic calculus, and does not allow for the
action to be morally inexcusable. The example of this would be the sadistic guards who enjoy
torturing a prisoner, which would be producing happiness for multiple guards and
Get more content on HelpWriting.net

Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism in its very basic form calls for putting benevolence into action, and by extension
calling for people to be concerned with the good of a population in general. More or less, through
such an ethical theory, we are encouraged to explore the full range of consequences of our actions
and provides direction of how we can make difficult tradeoffs between different kinds of values in a
humane and acceptable fashion. Therefore, the application of utilitarianism in our day to day
decisions involves calculating the various consequences of different actions and selecting the one
with the highest net benefit.
The case of Theresa Ann Campo Pearson, popularly known as "Baby Theresa", provides for us an
example in which the theory of utilitarianism...show more content...
It seems acceptable to the utilitarian to kill one person to save two or more. Yet this is an over
simplified assertion. If such were the case, a few people would be killed every now and then for
their organs to benefit the many. In fact, there have been cases in various parts of the world
where beggars and homeless persons would be rounded up and their organs forcefully harvested.
Such an action, in my opinion is wrong and totally unacceptable. But we still need to reconcile the
utility principle with the situation at hand. If Baby Theresa was a normal healthy child, of course
there would be no argument against her staying alive. Even a physical disability would not
warrant the actions her parents proposed. It is safe to assume that had she had an estimated
survival of a year, or at least two months, then harvesting her organs should have been a contentious
issue. However, as an anencephalic, Baby Theresa being alive was doing her no good. According
to James Rachels' benefits argument on Baby Theresa, being alive is a benefit only if it enables you
to carry on activities and have thoughts, feelings and relations with other people–none of which Baby
Theresa could

Utilitarianism Essay
Classical utilitarianism, the theory as described by 17th century philosopher John Stuart Mill, states
that the only thing that matters is that are the happiness and unhappiness that is created as a
consequence of an action; those actions are to be judged right or wrong solely by virtue of their
consequences, everything else is irrelevant. The theory also states that each person's happiness is
equally important. According to Mill, the right actions are actions that produce the greatest possible
balance of happiness over unhappiness. Although the theory of utilitarianism is widely accepted, it is
not without some very critical and persuasive objections. I will examine and analyze the "doctrine
of swine" and "lack of time" objections...show more content...
Premise two is more ambiguous; it is true considering life is no longer meaningful hooked up to
the machine because a person is not technically living reality, but false when life is defined by the
experiences of its surroundings. Because experiences in life are just projections of the mind, what
difference would it make if it was fed into the mind by artificial means? The end result would
technically be the same in this case. All in all, premise two has a conflicting logic, making the
argument unsound.
Mill tackles this argument by saying that some pleasures are just better than others. Types of
pleasures include moral, intellectual, aesthetic, and sensuous pleasures. And while the experience
machine might produce a profuse amount of aesthetic and sensuous pleasure, the quality of those two
types of pleasure would be outweighed by the quality of moral and intellectual pleasure of living in
reality. Thus, with the each pleasure scaled, living in reality would produce more utility than being
hooked up onto the machine, rendering premise one of the 'experience machine' argument false.
Even with the modified version of utility, Mill's response is still vulnerable to a modified version of
the pleasure machine objection. All one has to do is to design a switch for moral pleasure and set
the knob to maximum. Mills argument quickly

Utilitarianism And Identity Theft
Have you ever wondered heard about "identity theft"? Well, the video describes how people's credit
cards' numbers are being stolen by identity thieves using various methods, such as "Skimming". In
this method, the thief swipes the credit card through a small electronic device. In fact, this method
can happen anywhere like in gas stations and restaurants. Body: One of the major concepts that was
conveyed during the lecture was "Kantianism", where cat 1 identifies the action of stealing identity
as a very immoral action, and is also immoral as a universal moral. Since cat 1 is unethical, then cat
2 is also immoral. On the other hand, "utilitarianism" usually comes as in an activity that has bad
consequences on people. Utilitarianism is divided

Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that has long been the subject of philosophical debate. This theory,
when practiced, appears to set a very basic guideline to follow when one is faced with a moral
dilemma. Fundamental Utilitarianism states that when a moral dilemma arises, one should take
action that causes favorable results or reduces less favorable results. If these less favorable results,
or pain, occur from this action, it can be justified if it is produced to prevent more pain or produce
happiness. Stating the Utilitarian view can summarize these basic principles: "the greatest good for
the greatest number". Utilitarians are to believe that if they follow this philosophy, that no matter
what action they take, it...show more content...
Utilitarianism would say that the more "basic or lower–order projects" that comprise of these desires
such as family and friends, are unimportant and detract from "higher–order project" of maximizing
desirable outcomes (Singer: 341). The result of this reasoning would mean that all "lower–order
projects" would have only the purpose of satisfying "higher–order projects." This would make one's
only goal in life to make other people happy which is not the only cause for one's own happiness. An
individual's happiness is also related to a varying range of projects or pursuits of interest of
"lower–order projects." Integrity is a very important issue that is often overlooked by Utilitarians.
This is often the case because integrity is closely related to "lower–order projects." If an individual
did not have any integrity, he/she would a unfulfilling and boring life. Williams says that "happiness,
rather, requires being involved in, or at least content with, something else (Singer: 342)." These
"lower–order projects" are the defining characteristics of an individuals' existence and allow one to
achieve personal happiness.
"If such commitments are worth while, then pursuing the projects that flow from them, and realizing
some of those projects, will make the person for whom they are worth while, happy (Singer: 342)."
The examples that Williams' uses, shows us how two characters are faced with a dilemma

Utilitarianism Essay examples
This essay will present the key features of Utilitarianism and identify the problems of Utilitarianism
to the extent to which they make Utilitarianism unacceptable.
Jeremy Bentham founded Utilitarianism. He lived at a time of great change. With revolutions in
France and America, demands were being made for human rights and greater democracy. Bentham
worked on legal reform. Utilitarianism is associated with the principle of utility. Utility means the
amount of satisfaction or pleasure that somebody gains from consuming a commodity, product, or
service, i.e.; useful.
The hedonic calculus, which is his system for measuring how good or bad a consequence is:
At the time Bentham put forward the theory it...show more content...
Louise does not want to have sex. James, Peter and Matthew rape Louise, as there are three of them
and one of her."
This is the greatest good for the greatest number of people; however it is an immoral action.
Bentham was an empiricist (the philosophical belief that all knowledge is derived from the
experience of the senses), i.e.; food or sex. Bentham maintained that human beings
were motivated by their five senses and that humans would always seek pleasure and avoid pain at
all costs.
To measure the pleasure he devised the hedonic calculus, which consisted of seven principles each of
which could be given a numerical score. These consist of its intensity, duration, certainty or
uncertainty, propinquity or remoteness, fecundity, purity and possibly wit. This should make it clear
how beneficial the greatest good for the greatest number is.
An example could be "A car is on fire. Inside the car is a doctor with the cure to cancer and your
own child and you can only save one." Using the hedonic calculus you would save the doctor with
the cure to cancer rather than saving your own child. This is the greatest good for the greatest
number of people, even though it is not the greatest for the individual and family.
However, while John Stuart Mill agrees with Bentham's fundamental principles and approves of his
method he maintains that the

Utilitarianism
There are many essays, papers and books written on the concept of right and wrong. Philosophers
have theorized about moral actions for eons, one such philosopher is John Stuart Mill. In his book
Utilitarianism he tries to improve on the theories of utilitarianism from previous philosophers, as he
is a strong believer himself in the theory. In Mill's book he presents the ideology that there is another
branch on the utilitarian tree. This branch being called rule–utilitarianism. Mill makes a distinction
between two different types of utilitarianism; act–utilitarianism and rule–utilitarianism.
Rule–utilitarianism seems like a major advance over the simple theory of act–utilitarianism. But for
all its added complexity, it...show more content...
In the instance when an individual steals from another individual for his/her own self–happiness,
others in society cannot deem this to be justifiable, even if it may be more beneficial to the thief to
steal. Act–utilitarianism does not guarantee the protection to the victim of theft in this example
because, it's more focused on the greatest happiness and not on the consequences for others'
happiness. The greatest happiness may be given to either person in this situation depending on 'the
stories' of each (i.e. the reason for thief). Therefore, the idea of right seems not to be absolute. Mill
however, recognizes this as a problem and introduces the theory of rule–utilitarianism to compensate.
Instead of looking at the consequences of a particular act, rule–utilitarianism determines the
rightness of an act by an alternative mean. That mean consists of first finding the best rule of
conduct, this is done by finding the values of the consequences that follow a particular rule; The
best rule is the rule, which has the greatest overall result of any given action. Hence, one must
follow the actual rules of one's society. To illustrate, 'one ought not to steal' because it is societies
laws. Solving the issue of not recognizing the victims happiness due to the fact, according to Mill,
that these laws are based on morally right objectives. However, rule–utilitarianism is just an impotent
way around the problem presented by the simple

Examples Of Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism unlike other theories reviews the consequences of an action and according to Mill and
Bentham, should view happiness as being based upon pleasure that are more long lasting and
cerebral. I believe that utilitarianism is the most acceptable theory because it requires that we take
into account the consequences of an action to promote the maximum amount of happiness and
unlike deontology which does not take into account consequences nor does it take in account
children and mentally disabled individuals, whereas utilitarianism considers all human beings.
Utilitarianism is considered a consequentialist ethical theory created by John Stuart Mill and Jerry
Bentham. Utilitarianism is defined as an action made is...show more content...
The towns Sheff if can hardly maintain peace between the two families. One of the sons of the
one the families goes and kills the other family's son. However, only the sheriff knows about it.
What should he do? An act utilitarian would pin the murder on an innocent man who happened to
be passing by the town that day, in order to create maximum happiness. The sheriff is thinking
short term. However, a rule utilitarianism would arrest the son and put him on trial which would
lead the two families into even more disputes, but this is his job, so this would lead to positive
consequences in the long term. Many people believe that other theories, such as Deontology, is a
better theory than Utilitarianism because believes that rightness and wrongness of an action
doesn't rely on consequences but on motivation, or whether they accomplish our individual duties.
Deontology is a motive based theory. There are three main elements to deontology. 1. Every
individual is a rational decision maker. So, how we arrive at a moral decision is entirely rational.
2. The process of everything you do can be decided and worked out ahead of time. Lastly, 3. It is
concerned with the purity of motives.
There are many objections to Deontology however, which is why I believe that Utilitarianism is the
best theory. For example, it assumptions are that every being is a rational agent. However, it doesn't
take into account children and

Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics which suggests that the best moral action is the one
that maximizes utility. Utility is related to the good of human beings. Individuals who are for
utilitarianism defines utility as the combined pleasure after reducing suffering of all involved in any
action. Some individuals have expanded this definition of utility to consider not only the quantity,
but quality of pleasure, while focusing on rules, instead of individual moral actions. Others have
denied that pleasure has actual value and have advocated negative utilitarianism, which defines utility
only in terms of suffering.
Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, which states that the consequences of all actions are the
basics of right

Three Characteristics Of Utilitarianism
We first utilitarian theory. Utilitarianism on the characteristics of this moral behavior has three, one
is to focus on the performance of thinking behavior, the results and results, regardless of the
motive of behavior, or not pay attention to thinking correct or not, the motivation is pure or not, as
long as there is a good effect on the line. Utilitarian emphasis on the effect, so you can simply say
that it is the effect of theory. Second, before the behavior of it to weigh the comparison, to calculate
the pros and cons, uneconomical things, the loss of things quit Utilitarian theory to calculate, to
keep the mind to do this thing in the end is not profit, profit or less, it should act according to this,
so it should weigh to calculate to compare. It is absolutely undue to do things that are uneconomical.
Three is based on the individual, to others and society. Utilitarian theory is the first pursuit of
personal fame or happiness, he thought it was the most fundamental. For which you have to take care
of the interests of others and the public or happiness.
Taoism also has three...show more content...
People in their daily lives, dominate the moral principles of their ideology and behavior, there are
utilitarian theory is also moral, we only carefully observe, think, study the human life, it is not
difficult to find this moral truth. For example, people often say that doing something is worth it, it is
not cost–effective to do one thing; not only to say something is not worth it, it is not cost–effective
to do something, Whichever is greater, the two offsets take its light. Or tell a friend not to account
for small, accounting for cheap to suffer. All these, that people in the moment of thinking and
behavior is in the utilitarian sense of moral control taken under the control. Simply put interest.
Fame, benefits, benefits dominate the behavior of people. This is not uncommon in

The Effect of Utilitarianism Essay
The importance of human life, is really relative to the person is evaluating it. It differs from
person to person. To me, I value life dearly, because everything which has happened to me is
pleasant so far. But to some other people, it may not have been such an enjoyable experience. And
in some cases, people change their view of human life, as incidents happen which affects the way
they evaluate the importance of their lives. Such as people who experienced near–death, or people
who attained freedom after long periods of hardship and torture. These people would definitely view
their lives, and those who went through the same experiences, in a different light.
If we were to analyze Utilitarianism closely, we would realize that they do not...show more content...
If we were to consider all of these together, we would ultimately figure out that the positive utility
derived from the action is overwhelming. Therefore, it might be better to give the terrorists the
money. But if we were to think deeper into the consequences, we might have thought of the long
term effect that it might have on the government, the terrorists, and the community. If the
government kept paying a ransom every time a hostage situation occurs, the government would be
deemed as a very weak one. The community would then live with a fear, that the government is
unable to overcome the terrorist threats all the time. Therefore, most seemingly is incompetent at
other things as well. Whereas for the terrorists, they might develop a mentality that the government
is afraid of them. As they &#8220;earn'; more and more money from the hostage situations,
there would be increasingly widespread of terrorism, as the government is incapable of handling
them. Hence, in the long term, there seems to be an overwhelming negative effect on the whole
community, and the government. Therefore, we should also seriously consider not giving in to the
terrorists.
When we take the amount of money that the government is paying the terrorists into consideration.
A lot of other consequences come into consideration. If the amount of money we are dealing with is
small, relative to the funding the government

Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is the greatest good of the greatest number. It takes the view that an
action is right if it is likely to produce the best consequences compared to all the other possible
actions. The best consequences are those which involve the maximization of what is good and the
minimization of what is bad. The worst consequences are which involve the maximization of what
is bad and the minimization of what is good. The basic premise is the idea that the greatest good
comes from creating happiness for the greatest number of people. Pleasure and freedom of pain are
the only things desirable as ends. In Utilitarianism it is the greatest...show more content...
Along with these problems, there are many arguments for and against Utilitarianism and whether it
provides an adequate basis for making moral decisions.
An argument against Utilitarianism is that there is no agreement about what is the 'good' that is to
be maximized for all concerned in different situations. Who decides what is good for whom? And
whose interests are primary in these decisions? Furthermore does someone have authority over
anyone else in making these decisions?
Also, a Utilitarian would not judge the rightness or wrongness of the actions but rather in the
consequences or what has resulted from the actions. This means they take the view that it is
okay, and therefore right, to carry out an action which is wrong in itself as long as it has good
consequences for the majority of people. An example of how this could be wrong is; in a society
with a lot of rape and no rapists being convicted, the general public may be threatened and unhappy
with the thought of a rapist being at large. Therefore, if a police detective was a Utilitarian, and
under pressure to find the attacker, then he would feel it was right to convict an innocent man just to
make the greater number of people feel safer and therefore happier. This also means a Utilitarian
could not differentiate between an accidental death and a

Utilitarianism : An Ethical Theory Essay
Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is one of the most powerful and persuasive approaches to normative ethics in the
history of philosophy. Even though It was not fully articulated until the 19th century,
proto–Utilitarian positions can be recognized and discerned throughout the history of ethical theory.
(Driver, Julia. "The History of Utilitarianism." Stanford University. Stanford University, 2009. Web.
01 Oct. 2016). Utilitarianism is an Ethical Theory that was a result of combining aspects of
Consequentialism and Hedonism. With these theories in mind, the best consequence is the one that
maximizes on happiness and minimizes the pain. Consequentialism states that: "No matter what
act was performed to produce some result, if the result is good than so is the act." By the same
token, if the result is bad, then whatever act caused it is also bad. (As we discussed these in class.)
According to our PowerPoint in class, Hedonism claims that: "The only thing that has real value is
pleasure or happiness. Pain is what has disvalue." Julia Driver puts it into layman's terms for us
when she says, "Utilitarianism can also be distinguished by impartiality and agent–neutrality.
Everyone's happiness counts the same. When one maximizes the good, it is the good impartially
considered. My good counts for no more than anyone else's good. Further, the reason I have to
promote the overall good is the same reason anyone else has to promote the good," (Driver, Julia.
"The History of

According to the utilitarians, we should act upon the action that brings the highest overall level of
utility. In other words, there are consequences in all of our actions, and those consequences can
affect both ourselves and others around us. For Jeremy Bentham, founder of the utilitarianist
ideology, everybody counted for one, and therefore, every single individual's feelings were to be
seen as equal. As equalitarian and impartial as this ethical approach is, Bentham believes that
humans have an egoistical rather than an altruistic nature because "we are guided by pleasure and
pain in everything we do" (Gosselin, slide 11). Even in moments where we are performing actions
we dislike, Bentham believes that we are trying to maximize pleasure and minimize pain so that in
the long run, we...show more content...
In the specific case of marijuana legalization, we have seen that the great majority of Canadians
were in support of cannabis. That said, by focusing on the financial aspect of marijuana legalization
and on the decrease of social issues, the utilitarian approach brings every individual–from the
government, to the consumers, and finally to the society as a whole–to be positively affected by it.
Before going through the possible positive consequences of pot legalization, we must understand that
the fact that marijuana is still illegal brings the Canadians to live with "[...] an unregulated
underground market of dealers who have have no compunction about selling pot to minors"
(MacQueen 4). Is the war on drugs, then, the main problem, and not the drug in itself? Yes. By
prohibiting marijuana, the Canadian government creates gangs that impact the safety of Canadians
(MacQueen 3) while putting drugs full of contaminants in the streets accessible to the youth
(MacQueen

LUtilitarianism
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory which acts as a guideline on how people should act in certain
situations and was first introduced by a hedonist (pursuer of pleasure) named Jeremy Bentham who
put forward the 'Principle of Utility' which said "The greatest happiness for the greatest number".
Utilitarianism is a theory which bases on the end purpose (teleological) of achieving pleasure, our
decisions should be based on consequences in pursuit of the principle of utility (consequentialist) and
is a theory which judges each situation independently (relativistic).
Jeremy Bentham was the first contributor and developer for Utilitarianism and was most famous for
his version of 'Act' Utilitarianism which focused applying the...show more content...
Bentham believed that all people were entitled to happiness, and thus each to count as one and
no–one as more than one. However, there were many obvious faults in this theory; for example,
eating a chocolate bar is subjective to people who like and dislike chocolate therefore not every
action has equal pleasure and pain for every person.
John Stuart Mill, a fellow colleague of Jeremy Bentham criticised him for developing a 'Swine
theory' as it encouraged people to be selfish and recognizes no higher purpose for life other than
the mere pursuit of pleasure. Mill was concerned that one person's unhappiness could be entirely
overlooked if the majority were happy. Unlike Bentham, Mill focused on differentiating the quality
of pleasure and thus introduced a new theory of utility called 'Rule' Utilitarianism which acted as a
general guideline that achieved happiness without discriminating. Mill's definition of happiness
was tended to the spiritual and culture side rather than just physical. He distinguished between
Higher and lower pleasures, higher pleasures were in pleasures in tune with the mind such as
reading and poetry and lower pleasures tended to physical needs to do with the body like sex and
eating. Mill stated that lower pleasures are more easily accomplishable and thus have to be
completed before satisfying the intellectual needs of the mind. He famously wrote 'It is better to be
a human satisfied than a pig satisfied, it is

Utilitarianism
The most important question of all is what should one do since the ultimate purpose of answering
questions is either to satisfy curiosity or to decide which action to take. Complicated analysis is
often required to answer that question. Beyond ordinary analysis, one must also have a system of
values, and the correct system of values is utilitarianism.
Utilitarianism is the system of values stating that maximizing the total happiness of all people is
good. Happiness of people should be sacrificed only to bring greater happiness to other people.
Psychologically, immediate happiness corresponds to what you want. Pain, including psychological
distress, is the opposite of happiness. Actual happiness is not the same as...show more content...
Thus, a choice of values is a choice of the decision making procedure.
As with every other general theory, a naive interpretation of utilitarianism may lead to incorrect
results. For example, one may be tempted to steal to transfer money to a more deserving person.
However, our economic system can work only if property rights are protected, so the government
has a duty to prevent theft. Theft has dangers and negative side effects such as punishment of the
thief, distress of the owner, and abridgments of property rights, which are necessary for good
economy. Thieves tend to have an inflated opinion of themselves; a decision procedure for theft
must account for such inflation. It is for these reasons that theft is generally wrong, and for the
same reasons, most societies developed an intuitive disapproval of theft. In another example, a
judge may be tempted to misinterpret an unjust law so as to reach the desired result. However, the
power of the judiciary is based on their good faith interpretations of the laws. Judicial honesty is
essential for the retainment of such power and thus for the compelling benefits of an independent
judiciary. Another misinterpretation of utilitarianism is that you have to give away all your money
to poor people in third world countries. However, money can be

Essay about Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism
What is Utilitarianism? Utilitarianism is a philosophical concept that holds an action to be held right
if it tends to promote happiness for the greatest number of people. Utilitarians define the morally
right actions as those actions that maximize some non–moral good or happiness and minimize some
non–moral evil. Pleasure is an example of a non–moral good and pain is an example of a non– moral
evil. A utilitarian will fous on the consequences of an act rather than on the intristic nature of the act
or the motives of the agent. In short, utilitarians focus on ends rather than actions. An example would
be a person that litters, a utilitarian will argue that the act of littering is not intrinsicly bad but the
litter that...show more content...
The second story deals with a megistrate that is pressured by the mob to condemn an innocent
person in order to prevent the mob of murdering innocent people. The megistrate acts as a utilitarian
by condeming an innocent person to save the lives of the many innocent people. The megistrate acts
as a utilitarian but was his decision the right decision? Is utilitarinism always the right action to
take? In the next passage I will describe oppositions made towards utilitarianism. Bernard Williams
is the author of " A Case against Utilitarianism". In this passage Williams is against utilitarianism
because he beliefs that the actions that a person takes matter because decisions are reflected by
integrity, responsibility, and morals. His argument states that utilitarianism is only concerned with
the best outcome, and that utilitarianism does not consider and evaluate the actions that a person
must take to achieve the outcome. Williams's beliefs that a person must do what is morally correct.
For example, in Nielsen's mob story, Williams could argue that the megistrate did wrong in killing
the innocent man because he is always going to be held responsible for the murder futhermore he
has probably violated his values, integrity, and morals. Williams would argue that the megistrate
should do what he thinks is morally right because he is the only

Essay Of Utilitarianism
We often speak of "utilitarian" solutions in a negative manner, but it's very probable that every
human being will have to make a "utilitarian" decision at least once in their lifetime. Although I
don't agree with most "utilitarian" point of views, in some cases utilitarianism is a demanding
moral side that brings benefit for the sake of the majority. In this case, I give you a matter of life and
death. For example, a person has been in car accident and needs a heart transplant immediately in
order to survive. There are no suitable donors available, but there is a brain–dead person in the
emergency room that is being kept alive on a respirator, who probably has only a few days to live,
and who is a perfect donor. Without the...show more content...
By focusing on the overall happiness able to cause by this action, and disregarding self–interest and
perhaps integrity, the consequences of this decision will definitely induce pleasure and satisfaction
to a majority.
There is a maximum utility being made because, a life is being saved, and a useful end is given to
the less fortunate one. Another benefit is the deprivation of pain as only one man is to die, and just
one family has to suffer. "The Fundamental Principle of Morality is the Principle of Utility or
Greatest Happiness Principle." (Mill), this basically means picking the course of action that is
more likely to produce the greatest good of the greatest number of people. "This is and has always
been the fundamental principle of morality" (Mill). If you count the number of people who benefited
from this "utilitarian" decision plus the amount of happiness or pleasure caused, it would definitely
overcome the amount of pain caused plus the lives affected.
Despite the fact that many do not concord with most "utilitarian" decisions, there exists occasions in
which you have to consider their standards and ideals. The case mentioned above is an example of
how if I were given the opportunity to decide, would certainly consider this "utilitarian"

Bernard Williams Utilitarianism And Integrity
Utilitarianism is a practical doctrine that is widely accepted in modern society's economics, politic,
and ethics. Utilitarian is driven by the pursuit of happiness. For a utilitarian, everything that will be
helpful in the pursuit is considered good. In utilitarianism, an action is good or evil based on its
consequences on the happiness of an individual and the happiness of the community. Similar to other
doctrine, utilitarianism is not without a flaw. Bernard Williams, in his paper Utilitarianism and
Integrity, voices his primary concern in regard to utilitarianism by providing two concrete examples
to demonstrate how utilitarianism is only concerned about the consequences of the action and not
about the means used to get there. Williams argues that utilitarianism fails to acknowledge the
integrity of a person because the ultimate goal of utilitarianism is to produce the greatest happiness
overall. Williams demonstrate this problematic dilemma in the example of Jim. While on a
botanical expedition, Jim stumbled upon the central square of a small South American town. In
front of him is a row of twenty petrified Indians, lined up to be executed by armed men. The captain
in charge, Pedro, explains to Jim that these twenty Indians were chosen randomly from a group of
inhabitants to be killed as a message to other potential protestors that it is unwise to protest against
the government. Since Jim is a visitor from a foreign land, the captain offers him

Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is a consequentialist ethical theory. An action is right or wrong based on its
consequences. John Stuart Mill was an important philosopher in developing the idea of
utilitarianism. Utilitarianism holds that any action that results in a greater amount of happiness in
the world is a right action and any action that results in pain or less happiness is wrong. Utilitarianism
can be divided into different versions.
Act utilitarianism is one of the versions of utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism's goal is to maximize the
overall happiness of the universe. Act utilitarianism uses the Greatest Happiness Principle which
says in every situation, choose the option that you believe to be most likely to...show more content...
If the bank managers did not care about the customer's money, the FDIC insured all the stolen
money, the police were not unhappy because of the robbery, and the robber was extremely happy
because he could move to the Caribbean and never work again, then robbing the bank would be a
right action.
There are many good points to act utilitarianism. It is very appealing because most people want to
increase their happiness and reduce their pain. Act utilitarianism says that people could do that and
they would not only make everyone happier but they would also be doing what is morally right. Act
utilitarians will not have conflicts over any action being right or wrong because the hedonistic
calculus is an objective test that proves the amount of please or pain that will result. It is a standard
that all actions can be evaluated by. Another point or act utilitarianism that can be seen as an
advantage over rule utilitarianism is that each individual situation can have a different action be
right. This means that in every situation the right action will provide more happiness or less pain as
opposed to rule utilitarianism where the individual situations do not matter.
Act utilitarianism also has some disadvantages. One major fault of act utilitarianism is that some
actions would

Utilitarianism EssayUtilitarianism

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Best Paper Writing Services

More from Best Paper Writing Services (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Utilitarianism EssayUtilitarianism