More handpicked essays just for you.
John stuart mill utilitarianism refined full document
John mill utilitarianism essay
John stuart mill utilitarianism refined full document
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Introduction
A. Opening;
There are a number are numerous political philosophies that are employed in today’s government, one such philosophy is utilitarianism. It was originally conceived by Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832), and later revised my John S. Mill (1806-1873). The reason why the dates are included is that readers may understand that this is an old system, which should be all together abolished in the Government.
B. Thesis;
Here I will examine a couple of examples on the way utilitarianism is used in both the government and judicial sectors and while some believe that a utilitarian view keeps Americans safe, in reality it is outdated and destructive to America. This paper will attempt to give proof of the harmful effects of utilitarianism in politics.
I.
…show more content…
Background: What Utilitarian Theory is
A. First, it is a relatively simple ethical system to apply. To determine whether an action is moral you merely have to calculate the good and bad consequences that will result from a particular action. If the good outweighs the bad, then the action is moral.
II. Examples: Negative effects of Utilitarian Politics
A. Example of this would be the NSA wiretap scandal
The NSA or {The National Security Agency} has been under scrutiny by the media for engaging in
…show more content…
Perhaps even an essay the produce for school which would employ all of the above, creating a red flag for the NSA, and allowing for sufficient evidence to monitor that students activities and obtain a plethora of personal information. How is this accomplished? Jorgensen, DR, Paul, Carol Capek, Sam Gustafson, Jason Kadzban, and Donalyn Sandborn. "The Patriot Act- An Impact Analysis ." http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu. Grand Valley State University, 11 Dec. 2013. Web. 21 June 2015. Page
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that states that an action is considered right as long as it promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. This theory was first proposed by Jeremy Bentham and later was refined by J.S Mill. Mill differs from Bentham by introducing a qualitative view on pleasure and makes a distinction between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. John Hospers critiques utilitarianism and shows that rule utilitarianism under more specific and stricter rules would promote utility better. Bernard Williams believes that utilitarianism is too demanding from people and instead believes virtue ethics is a better solution. Williams seems to have only considered act utilitarianism instead of rule utilitarianism, which may have better responses to the problems proposed by Williams. Sterling Hardwood purposes eleven objections to utilitarianism which can be used to help make compromise between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. I will argue that rule utilitarianism can be formed in such a way that it avoids the problems that arise from Williams, and Hardwood.
On the other hand is also true that Utilitarianism may authorize the worst actions if it's still safeguard the welfare of individuals. Moreover it ends to ignore the identity of the individuals involved , their personal needs and the fact that among them there are differences.7
Since the terrorist attacks at Sept. 11, 2001, the surveillance issue often has turned away the table in the debate of individual privacy or counterterrorism. By passing the Patriot Act, Congress gave President Bush an immense law enforcement authority to boost U.S's counterterrorism, and the President used his enlarged powers to forward specific programs in order to reduce the threat of terrorism and defend the country’s safety.
In Utilitarianism, J.S. Mill gives an account for the reasons one must abide by the principles of Utilitarianism. Also referred to as the Greatest-happiness Principle, this doctrine promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. More specifically, Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, holding that the right act is that which yields the greatest net utility, or "the total amount of pleasure minus the total amount of pain", for all individuals affected by said act (Joyce, lecture notes from 03/30).
Mill, John Stuart. "Utilitarianism." Gendler, Tamar Szabo, Susanna Siegel and Steven M. Cahn. The Elements of Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. 77-80.
Many traditions and values of the American society are beneficial, but some are harmful. Acceptance of utilitarianism will preserve beneficial traditions while replacing the harmful ones. As a result, new traditions, grounded in reason, will emerge, and future generations may wonder how the irrational and unnatural non-utilitarian values had survived for so long.
Imagine a child living in a hot, government owned apartment in Chicago. He has no father. With his single, jobless mother he struggles to the words of the founding fathers: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable Rights; that among these, are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness...” (The Declaration of Independence). This is one of the most famous phrases in the US Declaration of Independence and has become the underpinning of the dreams of millions of people around the world. Although the words are different, these sentiments are reflected in the political and economical policies of many democracies. While the notion of ‘happiness for all’ seems like the obvious solution to many of our persistent problems, we inevitably encounter conflicts between our actions and our morals. “The state is based on……the contradiction between public and private life, between universal and particular interests. For this reason, the state must confine itself to formal, negative activities.”(Marx, 1992). This essay focuses on the issues of a prominent theory, Utilitarianism as it blends and encompasses both areas of Economics and Ethics which have become the basis of our governmental bodies.
Imagine living in a country where people know that their online activity and searches are unmonitored, therefore, nothing can be traced back to them. Every post or message will go unnoticed regardless of the threat it may pose. The National Security Agency (NSA) has become a controversial subject after being linked to performing online surveillance on Americans. While many may feel like their privacy is being violated, very few stop to consider the other side of the coin. To begin with, the NSA has a responsibility to protect the United States with every tool at its disposal. Just as the road traffic is monitored for public safety, online monitoring is essential to the
Mill, J. S., Bentham, J., & Ryan, A. (1987). Utilitarianism and other essays. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.
Domestic Surveillance Citizens feeling protected in their own nation is a crucial factor for the development and advancement of that nation. The United States’ government has been able to provide this service for a small tax and for the most part it is money well spent. Due to events leading up to the terrifying attacks on September 11, 2001 and following these attacks, the Unites States’ government has begun enacting certain laws and regulations that ensure the safety of its citizens. From the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 to the most recent National Security Agency scandal, the government has attempted and for the most part succeeded in keeping domestic safety under control. Making sure that the balance between obtaining enough intelligence to protect the safety of the nation and the preservation of basic human rights is not extremely skewed, Congress has set forth requisites in FISA which aim to balance the conflicting goals of privacy and security; but the timeline preceding this act has been anything but honorable for the United States government.
Classical utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory which holds that an action can only be considered as morally right where its consequences bring about the greatest amount of good to the greatest number (where 'good' is equal to pleasure minus pain). Likewise, an action is morally wrong where it fails to maximise good. Since it was first articulated in the late 19th Century by the likes of Jeremy Bentham and later John Stewart Mill, the classical approach to utilitarianism has since become the basis for many other consequentialist theories such as rule-utilitarianism and act-utilitarianism upon which this essay will focus (Driver, 2009). Though birthed from the same utilitarian principle of maximising good, rule-utilitarianism and act-utilitarianism provide two very different accounts on how the maximising of good should be approached. This essay will compare these two approaches and try to ascertain whether rule-utilitarianism is indeed preferable to act-utilitarianism.
In its political philosophy utilitarianism provides an alternative to theories of natural law and the social contract by basing the authority of government and the sanctity of individual rights upon their utility, or measure of happiness gained. As an egalitarian doctrine, where everyone’s happiness counts equally, the rational, relatively straightforward nature of utilitarianism offers an attractive model for democratic government. It offers practical methods for deciding the morally right course of action - “...an action is right as it tends to promote happiness, wrong as it tends to diminish it, for the party whose interests are in question” (Bentham, 1780). To discover what we should do in a given situation, we identify the various courses of action that we could take, then determine any foreseeable benefits and harms to all affected by the ramifications of our decision. In fact, some of the early pioneers of utilitarianism, such as Bentham and Mill, campaigned for equality in terms of women's suffrage, decriminalization of homosexuality, and abolition of slavery (Boralevi, 1984). Utilitarianism seems to support democracy as one could interpret governments working to promote the public interest and welfare of citizens as striving for liberty for the greatest amount of people. While utilitarianism at its heart is a theory that calls for progressive social change through peaceful political processes, there are some difficulties in relying on it as the sole method for moral decision-making. In this essay I will assess the effectiveness of utilitarianism as a philosophy of government by examining the arguments against it.
As a philosophical approach, utilitarianism generally focuses on the principle of “greatest happiness”. According to the greatest happiness principle, actions that promote overall happiness and pleasure are considered as right practices. Moreover, to Mill, actions which enhance happiness are morally right, on the other hand, actions that produce undesirable and unhappy outcomes are considered as morally wrong. From this point of view we can deduct that utilitarianism assign us moral duties and variety of ways for maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain to ensure “greatest happiness principle”. Despite all of moral duties and obligations, utilitarian perspective have many specific challenges that pose several serious threats which constitute variety of arguments in this essay to utilitarianism and specifically Mill answers these challenges in his work. These arguments can be determinated and analyzed as three crucial points that seriously challenges utilitarianism. The first issue can be entitled like that utilitarian idea sets too demanding conditions as to act by motive which always serves maximizing overall happiness. It creates single criterion about “being motived to maximize overall happiness” but moral rightness which are unattainable to pursue in case of the maximizing benefit principle challenges utilitarianism. Secondly, the idea which may related with the first argument but differs from the first idea about single criterion issue, utilitarianism demands people to consider and measuring everything which taking place around before people practice their actions. It leads criticism to utilitarianism since the approach sees human-beings as calculators to attain greatest happiness principle without considering cultural differ...
Utilitarianism is a movement in ethics which began in the late eighteenth centaury and is primarily associated with the English philosopher Jeremy Bentham and was later adapted and fully developed by John Stuart Mill in the ninetieth century. . The theory states that we should try to achieve ‘the greatest good for the greatest number’. Utilitarianism is a teleological theory of ethics. Teleological theories of ethics look at the consequences to decide whether an action is right or wrong. Utilitarianism is defined as a doctrine that the useful is the good and that the determining consideration of right conduct should be the usefulness of it consequences: specifically: a theory that the aim of action should be the largest possible
Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, were both english philosophers that were born around the same time period, Bentham in 1748, and Mill in 1806. What these two had even more in common would be the fact that they were both major benefactors of Utilitarianism. Jeremy Bentham was known for a few things, he was a philosopher, an economist, a theoretical jurist, and one of the chief expounders and developers of Utilitarianism (Encyclopædia Britannica Online, s. v. "Jeremy Bentham"). John Stuart Mill was also known for several things that he has done. He was an English philosopher, economist, a prominent publicist, a logician, an ethical theorist, as well as an exponent of Utilitarianism (Encyclopædia Britannica Online, s. v. "John Stuart Mill"). The idea of this essay, is to compare and contrast both Bentham’s and Mill’s theories on utilitarianism. Along with the comparison and contrast, we will be looking at the benefits, and the dangers of each theory.