To warrant my statement, the theory of moral responsibilities and utilitarian approach will be taken into consideration. To impartially resolve a moral dilemma, one ought to choose between the options that has greater weight. In order to determine the weights of moral responsibilities, a theory is greatly needed. One theory can be taken from Michael J. Sandel’s book entitled
Utilitarianism is the moral theory that the action that people should take it the one that provides the greatest utility. In this paper I intend to argue that utilitarianism is generally untenable because act and rule utilitarianism both have objections that prove they cannot fully provide the sure answer on how to make moral decisions and what will be the ultimate outcome. I intend to do this by defining the argument for act and rule utilitarianism, giving an example, presenting the objections to act and rule utilitarianism and proving that utilitarianism is untenable. Both act and rule utilitarianism attempt to argue that what is right or wrong can be proven by what morally increases the well being of people. Act utilitarianism argues that
Everyone in the world is unique, and by being so the world governs itself. The world is split apart into faction known as countries, and the countries are run by leaders of some sort whether it was inherited by blood or elected by the people; every country has some sort of leader. 1984 is a story of fiction, that of which was written as a prediction that predicts the future. In the book 1984 there is no individuality. There is no distinction between the past and future, between coworkers.
“Big Brother is watching you” (Orwell). Many people know of this famous quote from George Orwell’s 1984. In the book, Big Brother is the leader that rules the nation of Oceania. They keep tabs on their citizens through telescreens, which are basically two way televisions (Alasdair). Although telescreens do not exist in todays world, something even more personal does, and almost everyone has one; a cell phone, and the predictions of Big Brother have come true through the United States National Security Agency’s data-collection program known as PRISM.
In a world where 2+2=5 and the truth is false, The Party dictates every thought and belief of a people raised to never question Big Brother (Orwell). If you have no opinion, no personal notion, you will believe anything you are told. There is no reason to object. Alex Hamilton said, “Those who stand for nothing fall for anything.” Science says that the solid world’s laws do not change based on human sentiment, but the age-old question still arises, “If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”
Like machines, they are fully controlled. That is why they cannot act in a different way they are not allowed to. Any disturbance of identity may lead to the breach of the ‘peace’ and stability, it may endanger public security. Such is the truth of the ‘Brave New World’. It represents a disturbing, loveless and even ominous place.
By using utilitarian moral principles we can argue the case from a different perspective. Utilitarianism holds that an action that produces the greatest balance of benefits over harms for everyone affected. As long as a course of action produces maximum benefits for everyone. Utilitarianism does not care whether the benefits are produced by lies, manipulation, or coercion when holds a greater outcome for many. This theory creates controversy in business ethics in case of this corporation’s obligations to society.
Act Utilitarianism is an assumption that actions are morally correct when it can produce a high amount of good for a vast number of people. Also, act utilitarianism believes rules can be broken if good can come from it. Rule Utilitarianism is the idea that moral correctness of actions depends on how correct the rules are that would permit it to accomplish an immense amount of good. So the difference between the two would be Rule Utilitarianism, is established on rules/regulations and following the rules/regulations, even if it does not produce the highest amount of gratification and act utilitarianism basically is picking the action that will conclude with the best outcome/consequences. Terrorism in a philosophical way from a consequentialist
“The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas” by Ursula K LeGuin reveals the concept of utilitarianism, the values of a what is right and beneficial for a larger group even if it is wrong to the minority. A city that celebrates the Festival of Summer, always “bright-towered by the sea” brings the happiness of the citizens of Omelas and perhaps “like a city in a fairy tale”(1,2). Nothing can conquer the “one thing... there is none of in Omelas is guilt”, but beauty in every shape and form(2). But a “feeble-minded” child suffering “hunched in the corner farthest from the bucket and two mops” is cursed by the city's dependence for “their happiness, the beauty of the city… [depends] wholly on the child’s abominable misery”(3).
Now, let’s analyses the same scenario using a utilitarian perspective. What would Bentham say about this action? For Bentham, the moral worth of an action solely depends on its contribution to the overall utility in maximizing happiness or pleasure and minimizing pain as summed among the people. According to Bentham, “An action then may be said to be conformable to the principle of utility, or, for shortness sake, to utility, (meaning with respect to the community at large) when the tendency it has to augment the happiness of the community is greater than any it has to diminish it,”(14). In his utilitarian approach to abortion, Bentham would use the hedonic calculus which he designed to weigh up the pain and pleasure generated by the available
The utilitarianism is common approach to make ethical decisions. The main point of this approach is that you have to make that decision which comes with the most utility. The utility in this approach can be described as „The good”, and the opposite of this is „the bad”. This means that in Computer Science you have to produce a computer programme or a hardware, which produces the largest amount of good , and during the producing phase, it makes the least amount of bad, for all who are affected: customers, employees, and even the enviroment. With the utilitarian viewpoint people can make right, and ethical decisions, for instance if you produce a programme which can make life easier for millions of people, you should not sell it for extremly
Commonly, ethical systems are categorized into two major systems. The deontological approaches or normative ethical position which judges an action based on the adherence of the action to certain rules and the teleological approaches which judges primarily based on the consequences of an action (Hare, 1964). The Utilitarianism is assigned to the teleological approaches, as it does not evaluate an action by itself but by it’s
Utilitarianism is a moral philosophy that is credited to being created by Jeremey Bentham. Bentham believed that all humans make choices based on two feelings, pain and pleasure. Because of this, Bentham believed that motives are not good or bad in nature but instead on what feeling a human might feel more.
However, this is much more complex than the seemingly practical to use act utilitarianism. Assigning different ‘levels’ to different pleasures and pains can take up a considerable amount of time, when sometimes a quick decision is necessary. Furthermore, with both act and rule utilitarianism, the pleasure and pain of every potential situation must be calculated to decide the most moral course of action. However, it is impossible for one person, or even a group of people, to perfectly calculate every potential outcome – many situations will have extremely different consequences to what was originally predicted. Moreover, especially in larger companies, it is hard to measure far-reaching
Here you look on the difference between benefits and harms for the society and if the benefits are greater than the decision or an action is considered as ethical, if lower – unethical. Here it is important to identify the stakeholders and an effects on them from actions or decisions of a company. “You can think of a stakeholder as a person or organization that can affect or be affected by your organization. Stakeholders can come from inside or outside of the organization. Examples of stakeholders of a business include customers, employees, stockholders, suppliers, non-profit community organizations, government, and the local community among many others.”
