ipl-logo

Pros And Cons Of Utilitarianism

910 Words4 Pages

As a line of moral reasoning, utilitarianism appears in many instances to enter questionable territory with regard to its imperatives about acts that a deontologist might designate as inherently immoral. While it is worth noting that in many cases this theory works well, the fact that the cardinal, ideological pillar behind it, The Greatest Happiness Principle, allows for the commission of seemingly immoral acts in certain cases, raises immediate and pressing objections among many people. These morally controversial decisions can range in severity from taking away a child’s ice cream cone to the murderous quandary that was introduced in Williams’ paper; utilitarianism states that if there are benefits at stake, these situations are one and the same: no matter how drastic the measure, the action that results in the most happiness for the most people is the morally right one. This line of thought brings about the concept of a negative duty that results from the fulfillment of some positive duties in such situations; for example, if one were to …show more content…

This situation is, to say the least, a difficult one to navigate, and it is the type that one might employ as a counterexample in argument against utilitarianism; however, Williams includes it in his paper for the sake of generating a counterargument. He goes on to argue that though there are significant psychological and mental factors to be included in the utilitarian calculations of this predicament, they are far outweighed by the potential good that would be done by taking the life of one rather than many. The source of this situation’s inherent difficulty is the fact that such a drastic positive duty is required of the man who has been thrust into

Show More
Related
196 Words | 1 Pages

William's believes in Utilitarianism, and defines it as “ the doctrine that actions are right if they are useful of for the benefit of a majority”. This applies to the example he used when talking about the indians and Jim. He used this situation which stated that Jim had to kill one indian, and get to mark the occasion, and the other indians will be let off; Or he refuses, and there will be no special occasion, and Pedro will kill them all. (Williams, p. ) Williams also argues against the utilitarianism theory, by saying that it conflicts with human nature.

Read More
807 Words | 4 Pages

Consequentialism is defined as the actions that should be more evaluated on the basis of the consequences. However, it’s the results from that particular consequence that actually strikes a nerve. In the mindset of utilitarian’s consequences focus on the happiness and pleasure of that particular end result. The understanding that the consequences are so good that it outweighs the negativity; maximizing happiness for all. However, for people such as Bernard Williams we shouldn’t regard consequences as happiness or pleasure for the multitude of people, but rather the happiness within ourselves.

Read More
1325 Words | 6 Pages

Caleb Stephens April 15, 2017 Introduction to Philosophy The goal of this paper is to demonstrate that Philippa Foot’s objection, raised to her own argument against utilitarianism, is correct. Her initial thesis is that benevolence, while the foundation of utilitarianism, is an internal end of morality, rather than the ultimate end of morality. The possible objection to this that there must be some overarching reason behind morality, which must imply a form of consequentialism. The response she offers is that there should be some other form of morality, which is a weak argument, as it does not provide an alternate conception of morality itself.

Read More
704 Words | 3 Pages

Considering the perspectives of utilitarianism, deontology,

Read More
287 Words | 2 Pages

When it comes to the philosopher that is mostly correct about the kinds of personal sacrifices that morality shouldn’t demand on us to make in the name of common good, it is Bernard Williams. He basically states that utilitarianism is too demanding upon us for the happiness of others, where we can’t even focus on the happiness of ourselves. Not only is a person responsible for the things they do in life, but they have to be responsible for the consequences of things that they don’t do in life that don’t bring the greatest happiness to everyone around them. Utilitarianism states that even if someone were to feel a negative way on a subject due to their values or morals, they should dismiss all personal feelings and emotions to promote general happiness. Williams disagrees and I as well disagree with that statement.

Read More
1377 Words | 6 Pages

Before addressing the prompt, one needs to establish a baseline for utilitarianism. Mill’s definition of utilitarianism says that the best actions are the ones that produce the most happiness and the least amount of pain for everyone involved. There are two subcategories that fall under the umbrella of the ethical theory: extreme (act) and restricted (rule). Extreme utilitarians focus on a person’s possible actions and the different consequences they could produce. The Greatest Happiness Principle (GHP) is a system to determine which action creates the most happiness for everyone involved.

Read More
488 Words | 2 Pages

Victoria Mueller 03/16/2018 Philosophy 202-03 In this essay I will compare and contrast utilitarianism and deontology, describe why utilitarianism should be rejected as an ethical theory, and explain why I agree with deontology. Kant's ethics or deontology is the normative ethical view that judges the morality of an action based on the action's adherence to a rule or rules (quizlet.) According to the book "The Ethical Life", Utilitarianism ethics state that in order for something to be morally good it must produce the greatest possible amount of good for the greatest amount of people and have very few negative consequences for them as well. Utilitarianism relies on intrinsic value and not instrumental value, meaning that it has value in itself, and that you are better off in just having it in your life.

Read More
1565 Words | 7 Pages

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.

Read More
611 Words | 3 Pages

Utilitarianism is one of the best-known theory under the consequentialism, and its idea is the Greatest Happiness Principle(GHP). According to the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Utilitarian believe that the purpose of morality is to

Read More
284 Words | 2 Pages

With state-sanctioned punishment being supported by the belief that it is beneficial to the populace as a whole, utilitarians and retributivists alike agree that there is necessity. Though, beyond this point, the two philosophical views seem to split not when determining not the need, but rather the parameters, of coercive force. To a utilitarian, punishment is warranted as necessary based on the consequences of the punishment - that it will provide future benefits to the individual or maximize the happiness of a community. As a utilitarian, Jeremy Bentham justifies the normative grounds for legal punishment through these consequences. Utilitarianism, in this sense, is known as a consequentialist theory in that it concerns itself primarily

Read More
293 Words | 2 Pages

If a situation were to arise where a decision must be made immediately it would prohibit someone with a utilitarianism view to take the necessary time it needs to have a conclusive answer. Evaluating all odds in pressured circumstances is impossible. Moreover, in most extreme cases a group of people will invariably be affected emotionally, psychologically, or physically. If the motivation behind such violent acts is greed, ingratitude, or malice, this theory strikes those as undoubtedly wrong. Utilitarians argue that “when people are motivated by such things, they tend to harm others” (Shafer-Landau 129).

Read More
1218 Words | 5 Pages

The main principle of utilitarianism is happiness. People who follow this theory strive to fulfill the “ultimate good”. The “ultimate good” is defined as ultimate pleasure with out any pain. It is said that the pleasure can be of any quantity and any quality, but pleasures that are weighted more important are put at a higher level than others that are below it. This ethical theory also states that if society would fully embrace utilitarianism then people would naturally realize their moral standing in the

Read More
721 Words | 3 Pages

In ethics, a popular notion of what is able to provide the most good in regards to decision making without having to overthink problems is the theory of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism’s assertion is to conduct the action which maximizes the well being of sentient beings. Delving into this deeper, philosopher John Stuart Mill advocated utilitarianism as a means that which could provide the greatest possibility of happiness arising in situational circumstances put forth. Philosopher Bernard Williams would argue with this notion as utilitarianism does seem pleasing to solve ethical situations, however, does prove to have complications within the theory. Utilitarianism coaxes an agent to decide for the greatest happiness for all affected as the

Read More
131 Words | 1 Pages

When considering natural law and utilitarianism on the issue of capital punishment there are different conflicts. Natural law says that capital punishment is right because it is fair to all due to their birth nature. However, if murder is unnatural then capital punishment would be unnatural because it is considered state administered murder. On the other hand, utilitarianism does support capital punishment because it can be centered around to prevent future crime, inflict fear of punishment, and protects the society from individuals. Utilitarianism is the concept that greatest number of people gets the greatest amount of safety and happiness.

Read More
431 Words | 2 Pages

Introduction In this essay, I will be comparing Deontology to Utilitarianism. I will attempt to substantiate why I am justified in arguing that Deontology is a superior moral theory than Utilitarianism. A Discussion of the Main Elements of Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is a moral theory developed by English philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1947 – 1832) and refined by fellow countryman John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873).

Read More

More about Pros And Cons Of Utilitarianism

Related Topics

Open Document