Bernard Williams’ essay, A Critique of Utilitarianism, launches a rather scathing criticism of J. J. C. Smart’s, An Outline of a System of Utilitarian ethics. Even though Williams claims his essay is not a direct response to Smart’s paper, the manner in which he constantly refers to Smart’s work indicates that Smart’s version of Utilitarianism, referred to as act-Utilitarianism, is the main focus of Williams’ critique. Smart illustrates the distinction between act-Utilitarianism and rule-Utilitarianism early on in his work. He says that act-Utilitarianism is the idea that the rightness of an action depends on the total goodness of an action’s consequences.
However, it could also be argued that the mission's success would save many more lives, thus promoting the greater good. In conclusion, Captain Miller's decision is morally complex, and whether it aligns with Kantian Ethics depends on one's interpretation of the categorical imperative and the balance between duty and
The Golden Rule Many philosophers have views on Ethics. The moral approaches of Kant, Mill, Aristotle, and Held are all vastly different. “Kant’s principle of morality is based on his belief that the means justifies the end” (O’Neil, Onora). Mill believes in Utilitarianism, believing that “one should act in a way that produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people” (Mill, John, 118).
One of Mills' main strengths is the simplicity of his theory, which helps people easily reach a consensus on moral topics and situations. Act Utilitarianism gives clear directions on how to reach a solution to moral acts. Throughout Mill’s text, he provides examples and states what is considered happiness such as categorizing pleasures as high and low. Some negative that his theory focuses on the long-term consequences more than the short-term consequences of one's moral actions. Another would be quality over quantity pleasures there is not a definite good way to measure the quality of pleasures.
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?
“He who thinks and thinks for himself, will always have a claim to thanks, it is no matter whether it be right or wrong, so as it be right or wrong, so as it be explicit. If it is right, it will serve as a guide to direct, if wrong, as a beacon to warn.” Jeremy Bentham believed that each individual should be able to speak their own opinions whether they were right or wrong as long as they didn’t harm anyone. Bentham was a British philosopher, who was believed to be the founder of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is based on the principle of having ethics towards the morally right action, which would benefit everyone’s life and well-being.
Mill’s Utilitarianism Charge 2.2.1. Mill’s Utilitarianism 2.2.2. Mill’s Consequentialism Chapter Three: Rethinking the Emptiness Charge-The Formalists Reconstruction 3.1. Silber’s
In chapters 3-4, Mill explores what constitutes the theory of Utilitarianism, which he outlined in the previous two chapters. Mill first explains that for any moral philosophy to be relevant, it must contain built-in consequences for those who do not abide by it, for if it does not, there would be no reason to respect its principle. Mill writes that Utilitarianism, along with other moral philosophies, has extrinsic and intrinsic motivational factors. Extrinsic factors include pressure from peers, and fear of displeasing God. Intrinsic factors, which Mill believes are more influential, are rooted in one’s conscience.
Now it is time to discuss Kant’s polar opposite in the field of philosophy and ethics, John Stuart Mill. Mill is the man who cultivated the principles of utilitarianism. In utilitarianism, this segment of philosophy tries to promote a lot of the things Kant would of consider to be absolute detriments. Utilitarianism tries to foster an overall happiness for the human race and by doing so Mill tries to focus extensively on the consequences of actions. Mill would often support the idea that happiness is the foundation to the idea of morality.
There is not too many consequences that occur to the one that could help the victim, but the ones needing the help are continuing to suffer from the effect of hurricanes. People are not causing pain by not helping hurricane victims, but they are not creating pleasure either. If people do decide to help the victims, then they alleviate much pain and create much pleasure. Mill would also say that this way for evaluating moral situations are not perfect, but it is relatable to how people think every day and helps people understand what are the consequences to our
Utilitarian moral theories evaluate the moral worth of action on the basis of the consequence such as; the amount of happiness that is produced by an action, for the individual undertaking the action. For example; treating someone utterly as a means and not as an end in themselves as it benefits you only and you are then happy. Moreover ‘Utilitarianism’ is a theory in normative where mill states ethics holding that the best moral action is the one that maximizes utility, the ‘utilitarian’ ethics are also based around how much utility and benefit would action provide you , whereas ‘Kant’s theory contradicts that and states is not the consequence of an action which shows the moral/ rightness and wrongness of an action, and because of this
Bentham "An action is right from an ethical point of view if and only if the sum total of utilities produced by that act is greater than the sum total of utilities produced by any other act the agent could have performed in its place." However, whereby other ethical theories make the rightness or wrongness of an act dependent upon the motive of the agent, with the Utilitarian theory bad actions or motives can produce right outcomes as sometimes the best consequences are produced from actions. It is best then that for every action that we take, consider choosing the actions that produces the greatest net benefits or the lowest net costs. With this theory, moral conduct is rated and regarded very highly as the measure of consequences of alternative acts comes into
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”.
In other words, if a person acts only out of duty and not self-interest, their action is morally justifiable regardless of what the consequence may be. As you can see, this belief is different from the utilitarian who mainly focuses on the end result of an act or the consequences of the
