Utilitarianism Can Not Be Defended Against The Injustice...

Utilitarianism Can Not Be Defended Against The Injustice...
In this essay, I will argue that utilitarianism cannot be defended against the injustice objection.
Utilitarians may be able to reply to the injustice objection in some cases by invoking one of two
replies, the 'Long term consequences' reply, in which utilitarians will avoid unjust actions that
increase short–term utility because in the long–term they will not lead to the greatest good. The
other reply that may help utilitarianism avoid injustice in some cases is the 'Secondary principles'
reply, where some rule–based principles such as not murdering (because it generally decreases
happiness) may avoid injustice.. However, I will focus on the 'bite the bullet' objection, which states
that when we do not know what the long term consequences ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
An example of this is in the case of R v Dudley and Stephens (1884), where Dudley, Stephens, and
Brookes ate the cabin boy Parker, after they were shipwrecked for 24 days at sea. Although this act
maximised utility for the most people, Parker's rights were infringed upon as he did not agree to
being killed and eaten. Therefore when we add up the pain and pleasures of all those affected we
may end up infringing someone's rights. The act that maximises utility may cause unhappiness and
misery for the minority.
There are three standard replies to the injustice objection. The first being the 'Long term
consequences' objection, where a person following utilitarianism is not obligated to commit an
injustice, and that person should take into account the long term consequences of their actions. An
example I would like to refer to is the harvesting organs example. Where there are five sick people
in hospital and they all need organ transplants, at the same time a sixth patient is undergoing a
routine checkup. A transplant surgeon finds that the only way of saving the five would be to kill the
sixth person and harvest their organs. Utilitarianism would state that we should harvest the organs of
person 6 without his permission to save the lives of the five other people who are dying. A utilitarian
would explain that the action of harvesting the organs of
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Non Consequentialism Research Paper
Consequentialist and non– consequentialist
Consequentialist :
Consequentialist or teleological consideration is about result of an action, which can affect an act by
an individual or a group. ( T&K, p.30). There are two types of major consequentialist ethical
theories are ethical egoism and Utilitarianism. Universal E/E: everyone should act in their own self
interest, the consequences of an action will affect all the parties involved. Universal egoist refers for
all of us or for all human being to act on it's self–interest. A moral ethics which imply for everyone.
Universal ethical egoism is the universal doctrine that all persons should pursue their own interests
exclusively. Problem with this theory is how to figure out what is in ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
But it was believed that de could be cultivated and established in positive way. For the moral self–
cultivation, Confucius worked out for inclusive programme. Confucius moral philosophy and his
teaching gave the China a new directions of civilization and stability. According Confucius human
being are social in nature, one is bound with family, community and society. And it has different
roles and responsibility in social scenario. In Confucianism there are five cardinal relationship
between Ruler and subject, Father and son, Husband and wife, Elder brother and younger brother,
Friend and friend. Every relation has a duty of care and responsibilities. Confucius harmony based
on two virtues namely "Ren" and "Li", Ren translated as benevolence and goodness while Li is
ritual propriety. Ren is about the development of relationship between individual and community. Li
is a virtue that must be cultivated to make one fully participant in

Essay about Consequentialism: The Global Poor
The global poor have been an issue that the world has faced for generations and with the gap
between the rich and poor always expanding, we have to ask ourselves the question of "what should
we do about it?" and "should we even do something about it?". In this essay, I will be arguing the
moral implications of consequentialism and why Onora O'Neill's non–consequential view on the
subject is more plausible than Peter Singer's consequential view. I will explain what differentiates
Singer and O'Neill's views and where both their views come together. Consequentialism refers to the
idea that what is morally good or bad is all based on the consequences of one's actions. It is derived
from the Theory of Right Action which is a part of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
According to Singer's view, the consequences of this action, which would be if the homeless man
uses that money on food or shelter to better his life, will determine if the action was good. If the
homeless man uses that money on drugs or alcohol, then the action would be considered morally
bad. However, not all people agree with Peter Singer's consequentialist views on the global poor.
Onora O'Neill is another notable philosopher who draws from Kantian ethics. She is a non–
consequentialist and disagrees with Peter Singer's views on the global poor. Her belief is that what is
considered morally good or bad is based on one's actions rather than the consequences of their
actions. She believes that "Kantians would not need to know all the miserly details of a causal
utilitarian scope or the full results of any possible action. Instead, they must have good will, good
intentions, and it must be reflected through their actions"( "O'Neill vs. Singer: Utilitarian Famine." ).
This means that the results of an action should not determine if that action was morally good or bad,
but instead, the intentions of that action should determine it. O'Neill believes that what makes a
good man is if that man made an effort to do something good and what makes a bad man is if that
man performed an action with bad intentions. An example of this would be if you are walking down
the street and you see a homeless man. If you give the homeless man some spare money

Ethical Ethics In Consequentialism
Ethics is a system of moral principles. Ethics affect how people make decisions and lead their lives.
Furthermore, ethics is concerned with what is good for individuals and society and is also described
as moral philosophy. Likewise, ethics are also essential for the values of the argument to understand
Dicey's concept of Rule of Law. According to Hunt and Vitell (1986), ethical judgments are
determined through consequentialism (Teleology) and non–consequentialism (Deontology). Such
theories are important in decision making processes of Law Enforcement Agencies such as
Department of Immigration and Emigration (DoIE).
Dealing with Ethical dilemmas in relation to the Law enforcement Agencies it can be said that
Consequentialism can be considered ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In non–consequentialism are divided into two standpoints. Act non–consequentialism notes, that
people should follow their intuition in order to determine what is moral in a particular situation.
Likewise, in Rule non–consequentialism people should follow the rules that are the basis of morality
and the consequences are not important. As such, Rule non–consequentialism is divided into various
theories.
That is, Divine Command theory states that one must follow rules of god. For Example, Quran is the
Holy Book of Muslims, which declares that, "Surely Allah does not guide him aright who is a liar,
ungrateful." (Surah az–Zumar 39:3). According to Quran nobody should lie regardless of the
consequences. However, in Police Duties officers are allowed to lie during an interrogation of a
suspect (ref;;;;;;). Therefore, according to this theory, nobody should lie. Consequently, divine
command theory is criticized for Lack of rational, scientific foundation.
In addition, Kants Duty Ethics which is in three forms that is Morality by reasoning alone,
Categorical Imperative and Practical Imperative. Furthermore, Ross's Prima Facie Duties that states,
always do the act with stronger face value (Rightness over

Consequentialism Essay
Consequentialism and non–consequentialism are both action based ethical frameworks that people
can use to make ethical judgments. Consequentialism is based on examining the consequences of
one's actions as opposed to non–consequentialism which is focused on whether the act is right or
wrong regardless of the outcome (Burgh, Field & Freakley, 2006). The three sub–categories of
consequentialism are altruism, utilitarianism and egoism. Altruism is when the actions of a person
promote the best consequences for others, yet do not benefit the person who performed the act.
Abruzzi and McGandy (2006) explain that Auguste Comte developed the term to support his ethical
stance that humans are morally obliged to serve the interests of others, ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
From an egoism perspective the teacher would disregard the rights of others by taking the path of
least resistance in order to minimise the negative consequences for her. The consequences of this
would be that the teacher would primarily side with the community and also grant Del's family their
wishes.
Under the ethical framework of consequentialism and in regards to this scenario, it is apparent that a
utilitarian perspective would result in the most positive outcome. As a teacher you have a
responsibility to all stakeholders including yourself therefore, egoism or altruism are inappropriate.
From a utilitarian perspective a course of action would be organise a meeting with all of the
stakeholders involved to discuss the various issues and actions needed to implement effective
inclusive classroom practices both within the classroom and the school. Practices would involve
curricular and non–curricular activities. This action plan is justified because it reflects the
multicultural nature of our globalised society and all stakeholders benefit in the long term.
The four sub–categories of non–consequentialism are natural rights, social contract, deontology and
divine command.
From a natural rights perspective the belief is that above all else human beings have basic human
rights that must be adhered to regardless of the consequences. Locke (1690, as cited in Burgh et al.,
2006) developed the

Essay on Ethics Case Study
There are two main ethical issues that have been identified within this scenario. The first is that the
acceptance of McJack's sponsorship conflict with the schools recent efforts and policies to
encourage healthy eating habits and lifestyles. Furthermore, if the school accepts the sponsorship
offered in conjunction with the stipulated conditions it would ultimately be endorsing discrimination
against Molly based on her appearance.
The focus ethical frameworks that have been use to provide my final recommendations for this
scenario are Consequentialism, Non–Consequentialism, Virtue Ethics and Care Ethics.
Consequentialism is an action–based decision making framework which determines whether an act
is right or wrong based on the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I would, however, be trying to obtain a more suitable sponsorship to ensure my students had the best
resources possible. Utilitarian perspective can be described as "the greatest good for the greatest
number of people (Burgh, 2006). What I ought to do from a Utilitarian perspective is very similar to
the Altruistic perspective however this time I will also be incorporating my happiness into the
equation.
The possibilities of adopting the Consequentialism perspective may include that Molly would not be
discriminated against and the students would still benefit from alternative fundraising and
sponsorship efforts. The schools would stay true to its healthy living policies and my
professionalism with the principal will be upheld.
Non–Consequentialism is also an action–based perspective although it focuses on the rule at hand
rather than the consequence. Immanuel Kant contended that this perspective refers to acts as simply
being right or wrong– irrespective of consequences (Lafave, 2006). The four sub–categories
associated with Non–Consequentialism include: Natural Rights, Social Contract, Deontology and
Divine Command.
Natural Rights concludes that all humans have certain basic rights that must not be violated. When
considering the Natural Rights of Molly and the students in my class I ought to say no to the
sponsorship. It is Molly's natural right to be protected from all forms of discrimination against her.
Philosopher Rousseau suggests that

Critiquing Philosophical Approaches to Ethical Decision...
Critiquing Philosophical Approaches to Ethical Decision Making The purpose of this paper is to
examine the conclusions that I reached for each of the three scenarios listed in Appendix B. I will
explain how I reached each conclusion and why I believe each conclusion to be ethical. In Scenario
1 the mayor of a small town needs to decide in favor of economic prosperity or in defense of his
elderly citizens. For this scenario I chose the same conclusion for each of the three philosophical
approaches – the mayor could allow the developer to build on the proposed location as long as
provisions are made for the relocation of the nursing home and the senior recreation center. In
regard to the philosophical approach of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Virtue Ethics relies on the character and integrity of the mayor to do what is right for all parties who
will be affected by his decisions. Being responsible, loyal, compassionate, and fair, he looks to do
what will benefit the community, the developer, and the elderly citizens. He finds a solution that is
best for everyone that will be affected by his decision. In Scenario 2 Catalina must decide whether
or not to report and cancel three sales so that she and her coworkers can receive their bonuses. Using
the consequentialism philosophy, this was kind of two–sided. If Catalina took the advice of her
fellow employee, she would report the three sales in order for everyone to get their vacation
packages, larger bonuses, and new equipment, then cancel the three sales the next year. This would
seem to be the result to bring the greatest good to the greatest number of people. However, there
would be negative consequences that should not be overlooked. She would be costing the company
and the stakeholders by causing the entire branch to receive benefits that otherwise would not be
paid. She would also know that she was not honest in her reporting. As a consequence, she could
lose face with the company and could lose her job. She should not report sales that she did not
make. The deontology approach is based on her focusing on her duty to make ethical decisions. For
this reason, she will not report, then cancel, the three sales that she

Parable of the Sadhu Essay
Parable of the Sadhu: Analysis from three general approaches.
The "Parable of the Sadhu" presents a complex situation which action immediate action was
necessary. Sadhu, an Indian holy man, was discovered naked and barely alive by a group of
multicultural mountaineers during their journey. Each ethnic group did a little to help the Sadhu, but
none assumed full responsibility. Their priority was in climbing the mountain rather than carrying
Sadhu to the village where other people could help him. Although the conditions of the trip were so
that once the mountaineers went down to the village they might not have been able to come back up,
the author of this essay still feels guilty for what was not done for the Sadhu (Donaldson 280). There
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They focus on cultivating certain characteristics and look at every situation in terms of its potential
influence on the morale of the person (Donaldson 10). This method, although much more helpful
than utilitarianism, still produces an unclear response. On one hand, kindness and compassion are
both virtues that would be cultivated if the mountaineers decided to help the Sadhu and carry him to
the village. On the other hand, if mountaineers continue their journey virtues such as courage and
determination would flourish. It is difficult to decide which virtues are more important than others
and therefore, this method is too ambiguous to be applied to this situation.
Finally, there is deontology, also called non–consequentialism. Deontology, in general, focuses on
the motives of the act and the concept of "duty"(Camenisch 2). Kantian deontology assesses that
there is a Categorical Imperative – the highest moral principle that should govern all human actions.
This universal law is stated in two ways:
1) act in a way that one would act with anyone in the same situation, and so that one does not create
an undesirable world and 2) interact with people as human beings with rights and dignity rather than
means to an end (Camenisch 2). This moral principle would be the most fair and useful in the Sadhu
situation. McCoy's friend mentions in the essay that the mountaineers would have probably acted
differently if the Sadhu were a member of

Bernard Williams Utilitarianism
In this reading "A Critique of Utilitarianism," Bernard Williams discusses Utilitarianism: actions
that produce moral good and how personal integrity is more affected than justice. Williams also
discusses Consequentialism and uses two examples of negative responsibility to justify his
reasoning. In his introduction Williams, rejects utilitarianism and its consequentialist structure.
Williams breaks down utilitarianism's consequentialist structure of human life into two forms (direct
and indirect). He says the direct consequential structure of human life is integrity. Although most
people believe justice is a more direct consequentialist structure, he thinks otherwise. In addition,
Williams then precedes his argument by bringing about negative ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
While on the expedition, Jim ends up in a small South American town and has to make the decision
of a lifetime. Pedro, the captain of the armed group of men, offers Jim a chance to kill one of the
tied up Indians. If Jim decides to kill one, then the rest of them will be set free. Jim thought about an
alternative "if he got hold of a gun he could hold the captain...and soldiers for threat" but it really
sounds like a pipedream. Although, the other Indian villagers are begging Jim to accept, he is still in
dismay, because he doesn't want to kill anyone. However, based on the negative responsibility:
responsibility for things I fail to prevent and utilitarianism: actions that produce moral good.
Technically, killing one of the Indian villagers would be morally the right thing for Jim to do. On the
contrary, if Jim doesn't accept the offer, then Pedro will kill all of the Indian villagers. Furthermore,
Williams then goes on to discuss these dilemmas and his argument that utilitarianism doesn't focus
on integrity. Williams feels this isn't right, because utilitarianism cannot "coherently describe the
relations between a man's project and his actions." Meaning that utilitarianism cannot describe the
relations of an individuals motive behind his

Essay on Bernard Williams and Utilitarianism
The utilitarian faces many problems because he loses any ability to live a personal life. By this is
meant that in making decisions the utilitarian must consider the steps which lead to the highest level
of goodness in society. The utilitarian reaches for the greatest good for the greatest number of
people. Two main aspects dominate the light of utilitarian beliefs. The consequentialist principle
explains that in determining the rightness or wrongness of an act one must examine the results that
will follow. The utility principle is that you can only deem something to be good if it in itself will
bring upon a specific desired state, such as happiness or fulfillment. There are two types of
utilitarians: Act utilitarians and Rule ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
If he does not take the job, it is decidedly worse for the general good as he would be giving up the
job to someone with high aspirations to develop the field of chemical and biological warfare. This is
a danger to society. In taking the job, George is providing his family with a healthier living and also,
as a result of his lack of enthusiasm, he is slowing down the progress of chemical and biological
warfare projects. In this way, utilitarianism is showing that integrity is meaningless. These similar
ideas are expressed in Williams' second example.
A man ends up in a South American town in front of a group of 20 inhabitants who had protested
against the government and were about to be killed as punishment and to serve as warning.
Understanding that the man, Jim, had ended up in the town by accident, they decide to honor him as
a visitor and give him the privilege of killing one of the Indians. As a result, the other 19 will be set
free. The utilitarian response to this is that Jim should kill the one man. The utilitarian must again
forget his integrity and act for the greater good. Although his best benefit may be to not kill one
man, he must consider the complete picture; he is saving the lives of 19 people.
Williams has a recurring gripe with the ideas of utilitarianism. He believes that in making a
utilitarian decision one must forget his integrity, for in making his decision, it is not his personal
reputation which takes priority.

Consequentialism
Introduction:
For this Unit 2 assignment I have chosen the the ethical type Consequentialism. This is defined as
"Consequentialism: An action is morally right if the consequences of that action are more favorable
than unfavorable."(ref 1)
After looking at the definition of the ethical type of Consequentialism, I would like to give a short
example in my own words what I understand Consequentialism is. Consequentialism is the ethical
reasoning that would apply to a situation where the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the
few. Or what is less evil or bad in any particular situation ? You would make that choice based on
the ethical type Consequentialism. So in my life I believe that I have had to make ethical decisions
based on this ethical type. Whether it be at work at home with the family or with friends. ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I want to give you a real life example that happened to me 30 years ago when I was living and
working in Germany. Now we had a group of guys that would love to go to the disco on Saturday
nights in Germany. Now I lived in Germany and could drive but it was always a German guy that
drove and DID NOT drink. One day they asked me to be the driver, I happily agreed and off we
went. At the disco I DRANK ! because in the USA the crime or punishment to drink and drive was
not as severe as it was in Germany ! But not only that it was for a German ethically NOT acceptable
to drink and drive where as in The USA it was not considered as critical or it did not become an
ethical issue. So I drank.. Now after the disco closed and we went to the car the Germans had
noticed that I was drunk and DID not get into the car ! Wow talk about great ethics and ethics of the
Consequentialism type. It was ETHICALLY impossible for them to get in the car. Instead they
considered me a idiot and we had to walk 10 miles back to town ! 30 years ago NO one

Example Of A Consequentialism Research Paper
Consequentialism names a type of ethical theory that judges human practices, like actions or rules,
based on their consequences. Human practices that produce good consequences are morally right,
while ones that produce adverse consequences are morally wrong. For example, a consequentialist
says that you should do certain things, because those actions produce good consequences. The most
common historical variant of consequentialism is Classic Utilitarianism. Classic Utilitarianism was
promoted philosophers such as Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Deontology names a type of
ethical theory that judges human practices based on whether they are consistent with certain duties
that the theory holds as intrinsically moral. Consequences are irrelevant

Four Types Of Consequentialism
Consequentialism: is it right or wrong you decide.There are many different types of
Consequentialism but I am just going to list four ofthem. Each of the different types of
Consequentialism theories are each defined differently andhave many differences between
them.Utilitarianism: So Utilitarianism say that you should maximize the most good for thelargest
number. They used to call Utilitarianism "Utility" which is where the name came from.Google
defines Utility as being defined as economic well–being, a lack of suffering, as well aspressure.
(Hedonism: The term "hedonism," from the Greek word ἡδονή
(hēdonē)http://www.iep.utm.edu/hedonism/ ) Google defines Hedonism as "The pursuit of
pleasure;sensual self–indulgence."In other words Hedonism means that how things affect us and
cause usto behave or act a certain way is good for us.It also says that the pain and pleasure of life are
theonly things that matter. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
T

Consequentialism: The Argument From Marginal Cases
Consequentialism is a class of ethical theories stating that the consequences of one's actions are the
superior judge as far as to what is right or wrong, moral or immoral. The doctrine of Utilitarianism
falls under the umbrella of consequentialism and suggests that actions are right if they are deemed as
useful or are for the benefit of the majority. Alongside that, Utilitarians argue that everyone counts
and everyone counts equally. This imposes that each being, belonging to the moral community, is
owed a certain amount of respect and acknowledgment of needs. As far as who "everyone" truly is
and who belongs in the moral community, Utilitarians believe that all beings that can suffer deserve
a home in the moral community. Therefore humans and non–human animals, who are both
susceptible to suffering, are morally equal. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Ultimately, this argument claims that if it is immoral to eat "marginal" human beings and to
painfully experiment on them, then it is immoral to treat non–human animals in the same regard.
Because it is almost always the case that it is immoral to treat humans in this manner, it is almost
always immoral to do the same to non–human animals. Moreso, if we are not willingly ready to kill
and eat or experiment on human beings, then we should not feel as though non–human animals shall
be treated this way. In the eyes of Utilitarians, we are all equals and we, humans and non–human
animals, deserve to be seen as moral

The Pros And Cons Of Consequentialism
Consequentialism seems, at the outset, to be a favourable ethical theory, as it provides a
straightforward and rational framework for maximising a target value on the basis of determining
which act brings about the best possible consequences. For many, one of the most attractive features
of the theory is that it maintains an impartiality in cases of individual difference, such as gender,
species, race, class or creed. It is, however, considered by some to be too demanding, both in terms
of the process of determining the right action and also what it asks the individual to sacrifice for the
sake of the larger world. I will focus on the objection from Williams on the latter demand,
specifically the impact of Consequentialism's stipulation of ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Put simply, Jim is faced with the option of killing one Indian to save nineteen (Williams 1973: 98–
99). Utilitarianism obviously states that he should do so on the basis that he would increase utility
by saving nineteen lives (Williams 1973: 99). The problem with this for Williams is not the outcome
of the Utilitarian prescription but the lack of consideration it gives to Jim's personal point of view
(1973: 99). We can imagine that Jim's very identity might include principles of nonviolence which
he has committed to, or perhaps he is in South America to do relief work with Indigenous
communities and so the act of killing one of the people he came to help is abhorrent to him. Though
Williams (1973: 117) admits that, even when Jim's commitments are accounted for, the right act still
seems to be that Jim should kill the one to save the many, the point he is making against
Utilitarianism is not that it fails in a particular case to come up with the correct normative directive,
but that it fails to give appropriate weighting to an agent's

Can Utilitarianism Be Defended Against The Injustice...
Can Utilitarianism be defended against the Injustice Objection? In this essay, I will argue that
utilitarianism cannot be defended against the injustice objection. Utilitarians may be able to reply to
the injustice objection in some cases by invoking one of two replies, the 'Long term consequences'
reply, in which utilitarians will avoid unjust actions that increase short–term utility because in the
long–term they will not lead to the greatest good. The other reply that may help utilitarianism avoid
injustice in some cases is the 'Secondary principles' reply, where some rule–based principles such as
not murdering (because it generally decreases happiness) may avoid injustice. However, I will focus
on the 'bite the bullet' objection, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
An example of this is in the case of R v Dudley and Stephens (1884), where Dudley, Stephens, and
Brookes ate the cabin boy Parker, after they were shipwrecked for 24 days at sea. Although this act
maximised utility for the most people, Parker's rights were infringed upon as he did not agree to
being killed and eaten. Therefore when we add up the pain and pleasures of all those affected we
may end up infringing someone's rights. The act that maximises utility may cause unhappiness and
misery for the minority.
There are three standard replies to the injustice objection. The first being the 'Long term
consequences' objection, where a person following utilitarianism is not obligated to commit an
injustice, and that person should take into account the long term consequences of their actions. An
example I would like to refer to is the harvesting organs example. Where there are five sick people
in hospital and they all need organ transplants, at the same time a sixth patient is undergoing a
routine checkup. A transplant surgeon finds that the only way of saving the five would be to kill the
sixth person and harvest their organs. Utilitarianism would state that we should harvest the organs of
person 6 without his permission to save the lives of the five other people who are dying. A utilitarian
would explain that the action of

The Pre-Cogs: Feminist And Consequentialism
Explain how the movie deals with consequentialism and non–consequentialism, particularly in the
role the "Pre–Cogs" play in the movie and the idea behind Pre–Crime.
Consequentialism can be defined simply as being concerned with the consequences of an act or
event. Consequences are of greater priority than the act itself. This is a means justifies the end view
of things. There are two main forms of consequentialism, egoism and utilitarianism. The movie
mostly showcases the latter form.
Utilitarianism comes from the word 'utility' or usefulness. The idea is that as long as something done
is useful to society at large, it is moral no matter what had to be done to achieve it. It is the view of
the best consequences for the most amount of people. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It is clear that is unfair for Agatha and the twins to be kept as possessions or mere cattle just because
of a genetic anomaly. However, this society that uses the Pre–Crime system believes that a few can
be sacrificed for the good of the many. This is the main problem of the utilitarianism view; the cost–
benefit analysis or the ends–justifies–the–means approach. Because the society in Minority Report
trusts in Pre–Crime, they see people as numbers. A few hundred may face bad consequences, but a
few million will face good consequences. And this is an ethically good according to this

Helping Molly Scenario
Introduction
This essay will provide a theoretical understanding of the four ethical frameworks:
Consequentialism, Non– Consequentialism, Virtue Ethics and Care Ethics. When applied to a
situation these frameworks help teachers to resolve and justify their decision making. The objective
is to apply the four frameworks to the scenario Helping Molly, to establish the most ethical course of
action. Finally, a recommended course of action will be justification. The overarching ethical issue
present within the Helping Molly scenario is the community sponsorship and the alignment with
school beliefs and initiatives.
Consequentialism
Consequentialism is an ethical perspective that primarily focuses upon the consequences resulting
from ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
A possible course of action is to accept the further promotion as a whole school, to enable access to
new equipment and resources for all students and for Molly to be able to extend her talent.
Utilitarianism
The utilitarianism perspective involves getting the best outcome for everyone including the teacher.
The best outcome for the students in the school would be to provide them with new instruments and
give them all a chance to develop their musical skills. The best outcome for Molly would be to
further develop her talent thus boosting her self esteem. The best outcome for the school would be to
justify the decision to fund Molly's sponsorship by having the school as a whole gain additional
funding and equipment. The best outcome for Molly's parents and the community is to see the
children grow and develop. The best outcome for McJack's is to establish an improved name for
themselves. Finally, the best outcome for the teacher is to encourage a productive learning
environment.
The main possibility when looking at the scenario from a Utilitarianism perspective is to provide
students with the opportunities to grow. By accepting the further promotion as a school students
have access to new instruments and resources. If the school accepted the funding there is no need to
entwine Molly into the situation. She has already received her sponsorship. This can be seen as a
whole school

The Case Of William Potter
Introduction Many workers are presented with ethical dilemmas every single day. In the case of
William Potter, a conflict of interest arose as he thought about promoting his son, Henry, to CEO of
the family company. Knowing he could not make an objective decision, he went to a loyal, trusted
employee, Jill, to do an objective review of Henry for him. This then put Jill in an ethical dilemma
of her own. Though she knows that Henry is doing a great job in his current position in Miami, she
also experienced him propositioning her a few years back, consequently making her life miserable.
This conflict forces her to think about the good of the company as well as her own good, making for
a very tough and tolling decision on how to review Henry. In order to decide what action Jill should
take, both consequentialist and deontological theories should be considered and applied to her
situation.
Consequentialism
According to consequentialist theory, morality is entirely based on the results of your actions, or all
of the consequences that come from doing something (Haines, n.d.). In Jill's case, whatever she
decides to do will likely have both positive and negative consequences. For example, Jill truly
believes that Henry has done a great job with the company in his current position, and therefore if
she recommends making him CEO, he could make the company successful on a much greater level.
However, if she were to do this, she would put herself in the uncomfortable position of

Consequentialism: Bernard Williams And Paul Hurley
Consequentialism is a philosophical theory which centers on leaving the world, or state of affairs, in
the best state possible. Consequentialism embodies the saying, "does the end justify the means."
Consequentialists believe that a person should not worry about the actions, which they must partake
in as long as the consequences of those actions lead to the best possible outcome available to them.
The theory does not stop at individual actions, it goes further to include the actions of others, when
those actions could have been avoided through your own, as being under your control and
responsibility. As consequentialism develops as a theory, the practicality of its implementation is
questioned, critics tending to entrench themselves using integrity and its role as a central part of
their stance. One of the main scholars opposing consequentialism is Bernard Williams, who brings
up many interesting points in his work, Consequentialism and Integrity. One of the beginning issues
raised through analysis of Williams' work, is the lack of practicality act–driven consequentialism
has, when applied to an individual. If a person must account for the consequences of his own
actions, as well as the consequences of others in relation to those actions, an impractical amount of
time is spent calculating ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
These men take into consideration the way in which the theory governs mans' time and resources.
Traditionally it is custom to see a man investing his time in a project or action, which makes him
happy regardless if it will lead to the greatest possible happiness for the greatest amount of people.
Hurley states Williams's core claim as being that, '"Utalitarianism... cannot coherently describe the
relation between a man's projects and his actions"' (Hurley 5). A claim that Hurley expands upon by

Consequentialism A Good Policy Or Practice
When studying a topic such as ethics, it forces you to search within yourself so that you may grasp
the concepts of feelings that you have had your entire life. You knew what the feelings and emotions
meant, but you never really understood why you felt the way that you did. Consequentialism relates
to actions being "right" as long as they are beneficial consequences. Some believers of
consequentialism see nothing wrong with even torture if something good comes out of it. If the
outcome of a policy or practice is beneficial and it outweighs the harm done, then it calls be looked
at as a "good" policy or practice (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). This perspective almost parallels the
position of those individuals who believe that the "war on drugs" ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Where most of your police deviance is contributed to selfish needs or personal desires, a there
portion of corruption that lead to the desire to produce good outcomes for other people (Williams &
Arrigo, 2012). There are many forms of police corruption linked the war drugs, for instance when an
official uses his power and discretion for personal monetary gain. There was a Memphis Police
officer that was making a lot of what was thought to be quality stops until it was discovered that he
was addicted to crack cocaine (ATF: MPD officer pawned police uniform for drug money.,2013).
Some police officers also lose focus of the lines in which to cross that will assure justice for the
victim. For the officer it is a violation of ethical and legal obligations assuming that they are doing a
good job, therefore leading to an arrest or conviction. Receiving justice for the victims is the
primary objective and not adhering to procedural restrictions or professional conduct (Williams &
Arrigo, 2012). The physical and ethical war on drugs will be a continuous battle between the
individuals creating these policies that infringe on the happiness of the masses, but in return, the
minority will prosper

Consequences Of Climate Change : Consequentialism And...
Consequences of Climate Change: Consequentialism and Environmental Ethics A somewhat
commonly held concern is that consequentialism is an inadequate moral theory for tackling issues of
environmental ethics. In this paper I will argue that consequentialism can successfully respond to
climate change by, at times, evaluating the morality of character traits instead of actions. First, I will
provide a couple major objections that consequentialism must overcome if it is to be successful in
addressing the issue of climate change. Next, I will outline what a response to these objections
would require. Then, I will show how evaluating character traits or virtues would allow
consequentialism to respond to climate change without compromising its identity as a moral theory.
As with any moral theory, numerous objections have been made about the usefulness of
consequentialism. Here I will present some objections that consequentialism needs to address in
order to adequately handle issues of environmental ethics. The first objection that is often raised is
the calculation objection, and it goes as such: Consequentialism states that an action is right if and
only if performing that action would bring about the best consequences. However, due to our limited
knowledge of the effects our actions will have, it can be very difficult to determine what action will
in fact bring about the best consequences. The calculation objection focuses on this, arguing that to
determine through

Examples Of Consequentialism In Richard III
Throughout history, there has been a philosophy known as Consequentialism. Consequentialism is
the theory that "the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment about the
rightness or wrongness of that conduct." This means that any acts you do are justifiable if the ends
are morally acceptable. Richard III used this philosophy to justify the steps he took to make himself
King, but the vile and horrendous acts that he committed to achieve his goals were anything but
morally acceptable. In William Shakespeare's Richard III, Richard believes that because of his
deformities and because he was not properly rewarded for all the work he did to put his brother
Edward on the throne, that he is justified in taking the paths he ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
But although Richard believed he was just in what he was doing, the heinous acts that he committed
throughout the play voids any justification he had to begin with. In Richard III, by William
Shakespeare , Richard believes that because of his deformities and because he was not properly
rewarded for all the work he did to put his brother Edward on the throne, that he is justified in taking
the paths he does to make himself king; however, although he believes he is morally sound in
whatever steps he takes to obtain the crown, the inhuman acts that Richard commits in his lust for
power negates any justifications he may have had at the start. The lesson that Shakespeare was
trying to convey in this play is that sometimes, the ends do not always justify the means, and that if
you let your lust for power consume you, all that will come of it is

Deontology in Jim and the Indians
Jim has found himself in a quandary. When arriving in a South American town he has happened
upon a captain and his army about to assassinate twenty Indians in order to deter other Indians
protesting against the government. Jim is treated as a guest to the town and offered the privilege of
shooting one of the Indians in which case the captain will let the other nineteen go, however
declining this offer will mean the captain will carry on as planned and kill all twenty.
Consequentialism is ordinarily distinct from deontology, as deontology offers rightness or
wrongness of an act, rather than the outcome of the action. In this essay we are going to explore the
differences of consequentialism and deontology and apply them to the quandary ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Likewise in the Jim and the Indians case, we could only act on our own good will and not kill
anyone in the hope that the good will would prevail in the captain and his men. Deontologists would
be of the opinion that something's we are not expected to do, to perceive ourselves as moral agents.
However opponents of the deontological view, such as Nancy Davies (1993), would argue that this
is just "keeping ones hands clean". Davies goes on to argue that, "Deontologists ... not only assign
more weight to our own avoidance of wrongdoing–where wrongdoing is understood as violating the
rule–than to the interests of others, they also require that we assign more weight to our own
avoidance of wrongdoing than we do to the avoidance of wrongdoing tout court, or the prevention
of wrongdoing of others" (1993, p. 207).
However according to the rule based view of deontology, the taking of a life is wrong and two
wrongs don't make a right. To kill as of to save others' lives is not an option as the act of killing is
being promoted. It can be perceived that the captain, in his own wisdom, is of the opinion that his
killing of the twenty Indians is justified. According to consequentialism, the right or wrong thing to
do depends on what would lead to the best outcome; so each act is either morally required or
morally forbidden. We can presume so that a consequentialist who finds himself in the situation of
Jim

The Ship Has Full Authority
The scenario posed demands that an assumption be made that neither action nor inaction represents
a violation of orders. The Captain of the ship has full authority to make this decision. Therefore, any
action taken is consistent with standing or special orders that mandate or prohibit actions.
There are several matters that need to be addressed in deciding a course of action. The first is what
decision needs to be made? Based on the information at hand, the decision is whether or not to
render assistance to the personnel in the water from the sunken vessel. If this was an accidental
sinking, and in the absence of any other factors, the obvious answer is yes from any frame of
reference. The consequentialist would state that there ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
A reasonable cost–benefit analysis would suggest that the risk is not worth the potential gains.
So should the cost–benefit analysis be the only deciding factor? David Fisher argues in his writing
regarding virtues and consequences, "Despite its proud record of social reform, consequentialism
has been under sustained attack in recent years from both deontologists/moral absolutists, who hold
that fundamental to morality are absolute moral rules... " The author acknowledges that there is
significant credence to the idea that there are absolute moral rules.
Despite the scenario of the Chinese attack, most reasonable people would agree that an absolute
moral rule is to help those in need and thus rescue those in the water. The question for the
deontologist is whether or not they can accomplish this. The deontologist goes through the same
thought process that the consequentialist did. The thought process would be better characterized as a
risk analysis for the deontologist. The risk analysis will indicate whether or not the task can be
accomplished or not. Rescuing those in the water is still the right thing to do. However, this task
cannot be accomplished if the Chinese have the capability and the will to prevent it. The mission
will fail if the LCS is damaged, sunk or any of the stalemate scenarios occur as mentioned above. So
those making a decision from the deontologist

Broad-Based Blac Economic Empowerment
Broad–Based Black economic empowerment (BBBEE) is a program exercised in the South African
business structure whereby formerly disadvantaged racial groups are given economic opportunities
that were not previously available to them, in an attempt to rectify the inequalities of the past. The
goal of Broad–Based Empowerment is to distribute wealth across as broad a spectrum of previously
disadvantaged South African society as possible.
The aim of this article is to discuss the ethical consequences of BBBEE and other affirmative action
tools implemented by the South African Government, and the role of these measures in the present
and future workplace.
Stakeholder Theory
Stakeholder theory states that managers within a company have a moral duty beyond merely
maximizing profits and not involving potential role players
(Beauchamp 2009).
It says that a manager has ethical obligations to help all stakeholders within a company as well as
external stakeholders. These stakeholders include company employees, customers, investors and the
society in which the company is situated.
Managers have to make decisions in such a way that they don't do anything illegal or morally
frowned upon by society. The manager has to act on behalf of, and in the interest of both the
company's shareholders and stakeholders. These actions need to be followed through regardless of
whether or not the long term results benefit the company's shareholders – they should benefit all
their stakeholders.
Other

Utilitarianism And Consequentialism
In certain scenarios regarding Ethics, it is common to reach a conclusion through the concept of
Consequentialism. This is said to have been accurate for centuries, as Consequentialism focuses
strictly on the outcome and consequences of actions. The reason for this is the common belief by
many that outcome is everything. Throughout the last three weeks, I have developed a better view
on Consequentialism. Through the writings of Jeremy Bentham and John Mill, I have learned basic
methods of applying Utilitarianism and Consequentialism to ethical situations. As a brief overview,
Utilitarianism focuses on maximizing the "good" and minimizing the "bad" in life. The broader
concept of Consequentialism seeks the positive aspects and despises the negative. ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
The major argument portrayed in the presentation is the fact that 4% of the death row inmates were
mistaken and innocent. Because of this "high" percentage, people are questioning whether or not the
death penalty is ethical. There is also a lot of questioning on whether or not it is right to kill a human
being in general, regardless of their actions in the past. The presentation took the ethical, economic,
and scientific standpoints on the death penalty. In terms of economics, the death penalty would save
prisons a tremendous amount of money. Poison, ten minutes in the electric chair, and a single bullet
are extremely cheap compared to what prisons would have to pay. In addition to the prison saving
money, it wouldn't be required to increase tax rates to pay for executions, as far too little have
occurred to incorporate the cost into noticeable tax increases. In terms of the science, the quickest
and most efficient way to kill a prisoner is by using a firing squad. The electric chair and lethal
injection can take minutes to kill a prisoner, However, a bullet would work instantly. The other
benefit of the firing squad is the fact that nobody knows which of the men is the executioner. There
are several riflemen, but only one has a live round in the chamber, while the rest are blanks. The
rifles are distributed randomly, therefore making the executioner unknown, and delivering no
psychological

Difference Between Utilitarianism And Kant
Utilitarianism vs. Kant Through the readings we have done and in class, we have discussed the
moral status of many different actions using the guidelines of different moral theories. I will be
focusing on just two of the theories that we've covered: the Kantian perspective and the Utilitarian
perspective. In this paper, I will present the two perspectives and give my analysis of the differences
between the ways in which these two theories determine the moral status of an action. Utilitarianism
is the ethical theory that morality should be based on producing the most amount of happiness for
the most about of people as possible with our actions. Utilitarianism is made up of three parts:
consequentialism, hedonism, and impartiality. We must ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In theory, this sounds great, but in my opinion it is extremely broad and fails to acknowledge how
ingrained selfishness is in human nature. Also, due to the consequentialist component, intention does
not necessarily help determine the morality of an action: if two people bring food to an event and the
first person accidentally gives food poisoning to all of the attendees and the second person
intentionally gives food poisoning to all of the attendees, then their punishment should be identical
according to consequentialism because both of their actions led to the same consequence.
Kant, however, believed that we should only be held accountable for what is within our control–
once we make a choice, the results are beyond our control and we can only be held accountable for
our intent. I believe that the Kantians' perspective on intent is much more reasonable than the
consequentialist perspective and it is more in–line with our current justice system. Involuntary
manslaughter charges and the insanity defense are both examples of how important intent is when it
comes to determining consequences for an action. In addition to this, Kant's principle of humanity
states that we must "always treat a human being (yourself included) as an

Ethical Theories Are Used As Decision Making Tools
Introduction:
Ethical theories in philosophy are used as decision making tools (Trevino p38), many theories with
different frameworks with argument with and against.
These theories are used to evaluate ethical dilemmas that we face on our day to day life,
The Consequentialist approach:
In the consequentialist theory; all what matters is the consequences, means do not have any
importance as long the end result is achieved (Trevino p 40), and utilitarianism theory is may be the
best known consequentialist theory (Trevino p 40).
The utilitarian theory would approach the ethical dilemmas by a identifying the stakeholders for the
situation, and the possible consequences on these stakeholders, also it requires thinking broadly for
consequences and impact on the society level not only on the close circle around the dilemma
(Trevino p40).
Although such a consequentialist approach can be helpful and practical (triveno p 41), but also it can
become really challenging, challenging from the aspect that one needs to cover all stakeholders and
all possible future consequences which is often hard to achieve especially if one consider the
indirect future consequences and indirectly affected stakeholders (Trevino p41), the other difficulty
is the minority groups rights will be ignored (Trevino p42).
So as a start utilitarianism will consider all involved –as much as they can think about– and will
consider the direct and indirect consequences on all stakeholders, and it is looking to

Consequentialism And Consequentialism : Virtue Ethics,...
Ethics is a study dealing with standards that prescribe rules on what people ought to do based on
various criteria such as obligation, human rights, and virtue. More precisely, it is a development and
establishment of one's moral principle. And under the normative ethics, there are three categories of
ethical frameworks: virtue ethics, consequentialism, and deontology. In this essay, I will more
concentrate on consequentialism, especially utilitarianism, and deontology to make compare and
contrast analysis of each other and how each case works differently and causes divergent result in
the same scenario.
Both consequentialism and deontology is underlying the action–based theory, a traditional approach
to focus totally on the actions that performed by one. Although both consequentialism and
deontology is under the same approach, they differ from each other in the way the action is treated
morally right. In case of consequentialism, the rightness of one's action is judged depending on its
value of consequences. Utilitarianism is one of the segmented form of consequentialism which
indicates the rightness of act is belongs to the maximum utility that gives the greatest happiness to
the greatest number of people. A British philosopher, John Stuart Mill justifies the utilitarianism as,
"...the foundation of morals, utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle holds that actions are right
in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wring as they tend to produce the reverse of

Monetized Utilitarianism
Consequence Ethics; judging actions by the outcome rather than the act of doing; only the
"consequences" or the results are important. There are many styles of consequentialism; one of
which is Utilitarian. By definition, utilitarian ethics say "we should pursue the greatest good for the
greatest number" (Brusseau, 2012).
How is the lottery an example of the utilitarian monster? First, we need to outline what a utilitarian
monster is before deciding if it applies in this case. A utilitarian monster is an imaginary, or highly
conjectural, entity which derives the greatest amount of pleasure by the sacrifice of the many to fuel
its pleasure. Can we say the lottery is an example of the utilitarian monster? Yes. Even though this
money goes to fund ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He "believed that pleasure and happiness are ultimately synonymous. Ethics, this means, seeks to
maximize the pleasures" (Brusseau, 2012). This is also not a short term happiness, but an overall,
over a long term, form of pleasure. Could the case be made that, from a hedonistic utilitarian
standpoint, the lottery is ethically recommendable because it serves the welfare not only of the
winner but also of the millions of losers? Winning the lottery is a dream for most people and the
majority will not have their dream come to fruition. According to CBC News, the odds of winning
Canada's Lotto Max jackpot was one in an almost 29 million chance. "You are three times more
likely to be killed in a traffic accident driving 16 kilometres to buy your ticket than winning the
jackpot" (CBC News, 2009). This is not ethically desirable, as the odds of winning are exceedingly
low. Therefore, from the hedonistic utilitarian standpoint, over the long term, the only people
gaining pleasure/happiness are those winning, which is a very small number of

Consequentialism Vs Deontological Analysis
To analyze the dilemma one must understand how a consequentialist and a deontological would
come to their conclusions. A basic difference is the consequentialist would believe the end justifies
the means. A deontologist would conclude that irrespective of outcomes, the method or means
should conform to a stricture or rule set.
The consequentialist is focused on the consequences of the action. If the end result provides more
good than bad, they would conclude the action justifies the end result. To make a conclusion the
consequentialist would ask; who will be affected by the action, who would benefit from performing
the action, who would be harmed by performing the action, who would benefit from not performing
the action, who would be harmed by not performing the action. The consequentialist would then
make a decision based on were the most good would be derived. One of the most well known
practices of the consequentialist theory is Utilitarianism which is focused the the better good for
society. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
If the action itself is deemed inappropriate, then the action should not be performed regardless of
how beneficial the outcome would be. To determine if an action should be taken or not, a
deontological minded person would compare the performance of the action to a set of internal or
external rule sets, asking if others with this rule set would find the decision acceptable or not. If it is
determined that most with a similar rule set would find the action unacceptable then the action
would not be taken regardless of the benefits of the outcome. Kantianism is a well known
deontological theory, where it is believed that action are not measured by their outcome, but rather,
by what motivated the individual taking the

Social Consequentialism Essay
Consequentialism therefore states that an act, which maximises goodness, is the act that must be
carried out and this is how an individual must live. Unlike virtue ethics, Consequentialism will ask
question such as 'What are the consequences of a particular action' and 'Who will benefit the most
from a particular action, and will another action be better suited'. We can look at Consequentialism
in two ways
1. Agent – Neutral Consequentialism – this will disregard the value of a situation for an individual,
so personal goals do not confront anyone else's goals who may be in the same situation, so that the
act or act which the decision maker will take does not bias a particular individual.
2. Agent – Focused Consequentialism – this will only take into and be more concerned with the
actions of a particular individual and their needs, meaning that they are overly ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
1. Utilitarianism – an action can only be deemed to be right if it maximises happiness and minimises
pain for the greatest possible number of people.
2. Hedonism – pleasure is the key to life, and that every individual's goals should be to maximise
personal pleasure.
➢ Epicureanism based on the teachings of Epicurus, embraces life and implies the doctrine that
pleasure and happiness is the chief good in life. It can be seen as a more moderate form of
Hedonism being more concerned with tranquillity and happiness that the focus of individual goals
within Hedonism.
3. Egoism – concerned with maximising goodness for an individual and can be deemed to be a
selfish approach to society as external repercussions of a particular action. If detrimental will not be
considered as only the individual is important.
4. Asceticism – one should not be concerned with individual goals. It can be stated as the opposition
to Egoism and we should not be egoistic in life and a spiritual end to life, which should be met with
happiness, is most

Comparing Utilitarianism To Christian Ethics And The Bible
Any decision and action a person makes are based on moral principles that govern their behaviour,
known as ethics. Many different fundamentals of ethics rationalize and justify peoples decisions.
One specific theory is called utilitarianism. This research paper will summarize this theory and
evaluate the strengths and weaknesses relating utilitarianism to Christian Ethics and the Bible. Also,
an application of utilitarianism to the moral issue or killing another human being will be discussed.
Utilitarianism perspectives can be found in many situations throughout history. It is "one of the most
powerful and persuasive approaches to normative ethics in the history of philosophy" (Driver).
Utilitarianism suggests that "the morally right action

Jenni Lake Case Study Essay
The case of Jenni Lake
Stage 3 astrocytoma also called anaplastic astrocytoma is a tumor which the causes are still
unknown. It attacks the brain and the spinal cords. The treatment for this tumor is rude. This case
present a girl, Jenni Lake, 17 years old, which suffers of this disease. She was diagnosed with 3
tumors on her brain and 3 others on her spine. However, she is young and has the great chances to
recover from her tumors. Nevertheless, the treatment required some restrictions and is not favorable
to some health conditions like pregnancy. Then, while she was doing her treatment, she was
confused because she discovered her pregnancy. If she decides to keep the pregnancy, she has to
stop the treatment and cut her chance to recover ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There are many orphans in the world who just ask for a love from a mother. By adopting a baby or a
child, she would give happiness of somebody else, she would take care of somebody in need, and
she will make a humanitarian action. Some morals rules which apply here are:
– utilitarianism: this theory asserts that the morally right action is one that produce the most
favorable balance of good over evil, everyone considered: is she decides to interrupt her pregnancy,
she would save her life, continue her love with her boyfriend, have baby later by delivering or
adopting and be a good mother for her children
– Ethical egoism: that theory asserts that the morally right action is the one that produce the most
favorable balance of good over evil for one self. By taking that decision, she twill think about her
first and save her life
– Perfect duty which is duty that has expectation. By stopping her pregnancy, she would expect to
recover and have another

Peter Singer: Famine, Affluence, and Morality Essay
Lauren Formulak
Professor Mrozinski
10/22/12
Human Rights: Consequential or Deontological View?
Consequential ethics and deontological ethics (DE) mutually maintain that there is a right action that
we morally ought to do. However, these normative ethical theories differ in the derivation of what is
valued. In the case of human rights, both accounts are supportive of human rights, but for different
reasons.
Deontological ethics has as its basic thrust, the concept of a duty to do what is right. For one's
actions to be in accordance with DE, those actions must be realized out of a "notion of right (that) is
not derived from a prior notion of good", as explained by Illies (Illies, 2011, p. 107). A ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In this light, one who holds to the DE concept of human rights has at his imperative the treatment of
all individuals with equal respect, and the duty to promote their freedom with an "active pro–
attitude". Why does one do this? One does because this action, an "active pro–attitude" is good and
the action of good is inherently good.
As opposed to the deontological account, the consequentialist believes in the prior conception of the
good. If something is good then it is right to promote something good according to consequentialism
(Lillehammer, 2011, p. 90). Moreover, the actions with the best end results or consequences are
what are to be evaluated as good. It must be clear that good intentions are not, at all, of value to
consequentialists. Further, it is important to note that in decision–making, a consequentialist must
hold to the demands of impartiality. Consequentialism upholds the idea that no one person is worth
more than another (Lillehammer, 2011, p. 90).
As we read in "Famine, Affluence and Morality," Singer asserts that suffering from lack of food,
shelter and medical care are bad. If we accept this assumption, and if we can, by our actions, prevent
this bad from occurring, we are morally obligated to do so unless in so doing we sacrifice something
that is of "comparable moral importance" (Singer, 1972, p. 500). Not all consequentialists agree

Morality Of One Spending All Their Time And Money On...
This argumentative essay will discuss the morality of one spending all their time and money on
family and friends, rather than helping others. I will argue that it is morally correct to spend all your
time and money on friends and family because every individual should be autonomous and govern
their own life based on their values. I will argue this with the fact that as humans, we are rational
beings and have the ability to give value to our beliefs through action. If a person believes that it is
of greater importance to only dedicate their time and money to family and friends, then they must
use their autonomy to act in such a way that affirms these beliefs. It is morally correct for a person
to spend all their time and money on family ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Throughout Hare's writing on utilitarianism, many points can be drawn to say he has a clear
objection to not giving to all, those you know and those you don't know, equally. Hare says that
everyone is equal and therefore we must, "show equal respect and concern for all". (Hare 2009, 87)
He says this in conjunction with Bentham's statement on the equality of all persons, "Everybody to
count for one, nobody for more than one" (cited in Mill 1861: Ch. 5). (Hare 2009, 87) This is to say
that you should not view any single person as more than another person regardless of circumstance,
"in making moral judgments we have to be impartial between the interests of the people affected by
our judgments". (Hare 2009, 87) This entails that not giving to everyone would be a direct violation
of morality in Hare's eyes. In my argument I will discuss why I believe this point faults and cannot
be used within the parameters of the giving situation I am arguing for.
Continuing in my exposition I will now introduce an objection that Hare raised in his writing, this is
the objection that I will use and expand in my argument. The lack of recognition for the distinction
of every individual person is one of the most common objections to utilitarianism. (Hare 2009, 88)
In Hare's writing he says that this objection should not be accepted because departing

The Ethical Theory Of Consequentialism
Introduction
Consequentialism is one of the three main normative ethical theories alongside virtue theory and
deontology. In general, consequentialism holds that the right thing to do in any situation is
determined completely by its consequences. This includes everything that will happen in the world
as a result of the action.
There are a multitude of variations branching from this which may differ in what part of the
consequences they value; and as such have different value theories, but all will agree on the notion
that the ends justify the means. Leaving open how moral goodness is determined, we will look at act
consequentialism as the most basic form of the consequentialist theory. Consequentialism as a whole
faces a lot of criticism, this essay will look into the demandingness objection to act
consequentialism and analyse whether the theory can defend itself through the introduction of rule
consequentialism.
Act Consequentialism
Act consequentialism claims the permissibility of an action is based on how good its consequences
are compared with those of its feasible alternatives.
An act is morally right if and only if that act maximizes the good, that is, an act is to be evaluated on
the basis of whether it produces the best possible state of affairs, impartially considered. If it does
produce the best possible state of affairs, then the act is counted as morally required (or morally
permissible if the act is one of many possible acts that produce a state of affairs

Utilitarianism Can Not Be Defended Against The Injustice...

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Nicole Fields

More from Nicole Fields (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Utilitarianism Can Not Be Defended Against The Injustice...