More handpicked essays just for you.
A critical evaluation of Mill's Utilitarianism
A critical evaluation of Mill's Utilitarianism
A critical evaluation of Mill's Utilitarianism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In this letter I will explain Mill's Utilitarianism, Kant's Duty theory, and Aristotle's explanation of virtue ethics. According to Mill's Utilitarianism theory, all actions( means) are done for the sake of some consequence (end). Mill believed that the most important thing in human life is happiness, and all actions should be based on maximizing pleasure and decreasing pain. His theory focused more on the
I think I will divert the train to the right killing one person because one person is less important than five. Sometimes it is important to do what is right than what is morally good to do. The utilitarianism is a moral theory that gives happiness to the number of people in the society and it has been considered greatness, an action is morally appropriate if its outcomes lead to happiness and wrong if it results in sadness. I will begin by describing what Mill might do in the Trolley situation. Next, I will contrast what Kant might do in this situation and lastly, I will be also going to give my opinion on this Trolley situation.
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
Even though Utilitarianism has many concepts, all of which have a common goal to create the most amount of happiness for the greatest number of people, there are specific concepts that highlight why Mill is considered the most moral theory. One of those concepts is his idea of having rule utilitarianism and act utilitarianism for everyone to follow. Rule utilitarianism is what our society is today; we have laws emplaced for the common good of society, to keep stability and create the most amount of happiness within the community. General rules which keep happiness and calmness within the group. You may ask the question, though, what if a law is biased to a certain group of individuals?
According to Bentham, the Nature has placed mankind under the governance of pleasure and pain. They point out what we ought to do and determine what we shall do. One hand there is the standard of right and wrong and on the other hand lies the chain of causes and effects. This is called the Principle of Utility(PoU). The more consistently the PoU is pursued, the better it is for the mankind.
Kant is more rigid with the rules meaning a rule is set in place for a reason so it is supposed to be followed. He writes “ well worth Avenue in action depends neither on the result expected from that action nor on any principle of action that has to borrow its motive from this expected result” (Kant 106). this means the decisions and should not be made based on what the person will receive or what the person has the ability to receive. For example, I have moved my friend money for him to be able to purchase wheels for his truck. Give me money back was not an issue because he is not he would find himself a transportation to school which will benefit his future as well as his ability to get to his job.
According to Mill the Greatest Happiness Principle (GHP) or Utility, is the making of decisions that will produce the greatest amount of happiness and avoiding the choices that will produce a great amount of the reverse of happiness. Happiness is characterized by intended pleasure and the lacking of pain. Mill has stated that actions are right if they promote happiness but they are wrong if they produce the reverse of happiness (pain). He also states that the only desirable ends are those that involve pleasure and freedom from pain. Things are desirable because they help reduce pain or produce pleasure.
Challenging morality and natural rights Finally, Mill's utilitarian approach dismisses paternalism on two crucial grounds: that of morality and natural rights. To Mill, it seems that coercive paternalism attempts to promote ideals and absolutes; to prevent all negative outcomes, and to eliminate bad choices. It claims that 'we are intractably irrational' and that 'we have a natural, even biological, tendency towards social conformity' (Conly, 2013, pp.7-9); that we are not seeking changes and improvements, and rather fall into a state of discomfort and a lack of motivations. Therefore, as a natural right, we need an outside help that would guide citizens and limit their wrong choices. This view, however, clashes with Mill's liberalism that
The dignity of man consists in the ability to make a universal law that he himself must obey. And man formulates the universal law by means of reason.” Kant concludes that the principle of morality is a moral law capable of universalization and created through reason, guiding us to the virtuous action in any circumstance. Further, he concludes that virtue comes from good will. Therefore, I am permitted to conclude that a person could perform non-virtuous acts on many occasions but still be considered virtuous when performing virtuous acts.
Topic:- The Critical Study of Kant’s Doctrine of Right. Introduction: What is Right? A right is the sovereignty to act without the permission of others.
He says that one must act not only in accordance to duty, but for the sake of duty However, According to the Utilitarianism, Mill emphasizes that the actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness Immanuel Kant is the founder of the Kantian branch of ethics and morality, and his theories are personally my favorite theory of ethics so far. According to the utilitarianism, the best action is the one that maximizes utility. However, in Kant’s moral philosophy, people
John Stuart Mill, at the very beginning of chapter 2 entitled “what is utilitarianism”. starts off by explaining to the readers what utility is, Utility is defined as pleasure itself, and the absence of pain. This leads us to another name for utility which is the greatest happiness principle. Mill claims that “actions are right in proportions as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” “By Happiness is intended pleasure and the absence of pain, by happiness, pain and the privation of pleasure”.
Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill are two of the most notable philosophers in normative ethics. This branch of ethics is based on moral standards that determine what is considered morally right and wrong. This paper will focus on Immanuel Kant’s theory of deontology and J.S. Mill’s theory of utilitarianism. While Mill takes a consequentialist approach, focused on the belief that actions are right if they are for the benefit of a majority, Kant is solely concerned with the nature of duty and obligation, regardless of the outcome. This paper will also reveal that Kantian ethics, in my opinion, is a better moral law to follow compared to the utilitarian position.
Morality and Religion: A Psychological Perspective The relationship between morality and religion is a common topic of debate, across cultures. Many argue that without religion one’s moral compass will be askew, while others view morality as being based in autonomy and real life experiences. In this article, Anca Mustea, Oana Negru, and Adrian Opre explored approaches to morality, types of morality, and religion’s role morality.
Rethinking Principle of Utility What is the guideline of your behavior and what does pleasure means to you? In Bentham’s book An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, he gives a detailed explanation of principle of utility, a series of principles of behaviors. He thinks it is pleasure and pain that determine what human beings should do, and the motivation of humans’ behaviors can be attributed to the pursuit of happiness or the evasion of pain. Besides, he states that a good action should increase the happiness or diminish the pain, otherwise the action will be harmful to the whole community.
