Ethics is a system of moral principles and it affects how people make decisions and lead their life (bbc.co.uk/ethics/introduction/intro_1.shtml) and there are different branches of ethics which are Meta-ethics the study of language; Normative ethics is the study of moral standard that we live our lives by and; Applied ethics is the application of ethical theories to access whether something is ethical. Restraint is a measure of protecting someone or something out of danger (oxforddictionaries.com/definition/English/restraint). Mental illness refers to different kind of mental health conditions or disorders that my affect your mood, thinking and behaviour (Mental illness-Mayo Clinic). Joseph Fletcher was the main philosopher who created the …show more content…
Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory Bentham believes that a morally good action is the one that helps the greatest number of people (Utilitarianism| Definition of Utilitarianism by Merriam-Webster) then the action is ethical. Bentham was very worried about the social and legal reform, in which he wanted the ethical theory that will decide if something is good or bad regarding on how effective it can be to the majority of people. According to the Act Utilitarianism of Jeremy Bentham, proclaim the total amount of happiness for all people, not average pleasure. He called this the principle of utility. Utility is the usefulness of the results of actions. So Bentham equated happiness with pleasure and the absence of pain (Bentham’s act utilitarianism-presentations). Act Utilitarianism has its strength because it is a flexible meaning that you can decide what is good or bad depending on the situation. The happiness is the end good, ‘the greatest good for the greatest number’ meaning that the amount of happiness for the largest number. The circumstances could change the morality of an action, because there is no absolute right or wrong. What is unethical is one situation could be ethical in another. The weaknesses of the Act utilitarianism are that: it is difficult to predict consequences, there is no defence of minorities, it is only working …show more content…
Therefore his theory is qualitative. Mill argues that the man should attempt to achieve their highest potential and not bend down to the level of non-human animal or, as Mill put it ‘Better be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied’. He has a point that we should focus on the utility (pleasure/happiness) of the rules rather than the single act. Mill believes that there are principles means for securing the greater good. For example, utilitarianism may say that lying is acceptable in some situation, while there can be good reasons for lying in specific circumstances, as an overall principle lying cannot be supported because it cannot support the greatest good for the greatest number. So Mill noted that it is wrong to lie because people would find it so difficult to trust each other, but that is better for the society as a whole if they all tell the truth. He therefore proposed a rule can contribute to an individual’s short-term happiness, but is detrimental to long-term happiness for all concerned (John Stuart mill-presentation). Rule Utilitarianism pros are that: it is simple to calculate the utility because it focuses on long-term consequences, there are enough general rules need to be calculated (like on a case-by case basis), so it solves problems with Moral Luck and appeal to a wide cross-section of society. The