Overall Well Being Consequentialism Essay

In its simplest form, consequentialism requires that one maximizes the overall well being of any situation whenever possible. Consequentialism also promotes impartiality and moral flexibility. In other words, consequentialism treats everyone as equals and allows for more wiggle room when it comes to breaking certain moral rules as long as the means justify the ends. Although there is no exact way to calculate the overall well being, John Stuart Mill suggested that we focus on “the greatest good for the greatest number” (Shafer-Landau 122). On the surface, consequentialism may seem like a viable moral theory. After all, consequentialism provides equality for all, overall well being, and moral flexibility; however, at times, the moral flexibility part of consequentialism requires us to commit injustice which voids all the positives of the theory. Consequentialism can be both beneficial and ineffective depending on the

This takes away from all the good parts of this theory because the “overall well being” is subjective, and impartiality is now compromised because the well being of one person is more important than another. For example, putting consequentialism to work during wartime would be impossible. For one, we care more about our own country’s well being than the opposing country’s well being; for example, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in this case is morally justified because it ended the war and prevented greater harm (149). Many argue that injustice is sometimes necessary in order to achieve the overall well being. Supposing that the overall well being was objective and we could count the lives lost over the lives saved, then consequentialism has the upper hand because more good was done overall. In this case, justice is still taken into consideration, however, it isn’t as important to the overall moral picture