Morality According To John Stuart Mill's Theories

Ethics since its conception has been the subject of study of many philosophers and thinkers who have tried to develop theories on this subject; ethics and morality are not only etymologically related. At present, they are used interchangeably as synonymous terms. Thus, we can both say John has acted in an immoral way as John has acted without any kind of ethics, or also, my moral code prevents me from doing this or my ethics prevents me from behaving like this. But, although in a lax sense they can be used in this way, in a strict sense they have different meanings. In the philosophical language one usually distinguishes between the moral, or code of norms that regulate the correct action, and the ethics, the reflection on the moral.

Therefore, the actions and norms must be judged according to the principle of utility or of maximum happiness. Like other theories it constitutes a teleoenological ethics, because it values the actions as means to reach an end and according to the consequences that are detached from them: an action is good when its consequences are useful (they approach us to the happiness) and it is bad when Its consequences are not (they keep us away from it). According to John Stuart Mill, the main difference between utilitarianism and classical hedonism (epicureism) is that the first transcends the personal sphere: it does not understand by happiness the personal interest or pleasure, but the maximum benefit for the greater number of people. Pleasure is a common good. Mill distinguishes between inferior and superior pleasures: There are more estimable pleasures than others as they promote or not the moral development of the human being

Today's decision-making is highly influenced by economic variables, which have been understood as far from ethical thinking., for example the company, pharmaceutical knowing that there is ignorance about the origin of a particular component of a Defective drug, you will decide whether to hire providers that provide a better option. In this case it can be determined that there is greater suffering if new providers are not hired. Doing so would benefit the three actors in some way. To begin with, the company would continue with the prestige that characterized it and not lose its customers, in addition to having been able to launch a product that does not generate any kind of discomfort and unfortunate accidents among consumers. Then, customers would be the ones who would benefit the most, because they would not be buying a drug that could kill them, they would be getting a product of higher quality and safety. Finally, there is not much need to explain the benefit of adding a customer to our company that can provide quality products. Therefore, according to the utilitarian theory, the most ethical and beneficial decision would be to choose to change from proveedor.de raw materials of