When looking at consequentialism, or utilitarianism, only the results and the greatest happiness matter. There are some difficulties when applying this theory for George and I believe there are always more than one answer for George. First of all, considering utilitarianism, all George has to do is that he should take the job in order to get the greatest happiness. Using the hedonistic calculus, if George determines that his family will be suffering would bring more unhappiness than happiness for all concerned, taking the job could be justified under this theory. Here is an assumption of why George should take the job. First, if George takes the job, then he will gain the greatest happiness. Second, gaining the greatest happiness is a utilitarian required to do. Therefore, …show more content…
Suppose George who saves his family that he agrees with creating biochemical weapons. George feels very bad and the fact that the society is going to suffer because of him. I believe that George eases the knowledge that he unselfishly sacrifices his happiness and the society’s happiness of a greater number. Even though George’s actions are based on act utilitarianism perspective, they seem unethical. Our relationships with the people we care would produce particular responsibilities toward them: when we get married, we are promising to accept specific obligations to our partners. For rule utilitarianism, it tells us to follow a set of rules that maximizes utility such as “keep your promise, otherwise you will get hurt”. The rules permit us to account for obligations to specific people. If I apply rule utilitarianism to the dilemma facing George, he will get a different result from act utilitarianism. First, if George accepts a rule that conditions that parents have the responsibility to take care of their children, George saves his family will not be violated of his duties as a