More handpicked essays just for you.
Rule utilitarianism essay
Which is better act utilitarianism vs rule utilitarianism
Rule utilitarianism essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
“The only rational course of action is to allow people to override the rules in the interest of the greatest utility.”
Act and Rule Utilitarianism are said to be very similar and maybe even collapse into each other when trying to distinguish one from the other. One article has distinguished between act and rule utilitarianism by referring to them as "extreme" and "restricted" utilitarianism. This article claims that the extreme or act version of utilitarianism will use the rules of morality as rules of thumb only. Those rules can be changed at any time in the interest of the greatest good or greatest happiness.
This article claims that act utilitarianism is superior to rule utilitarianism because the act utilitarian recognizes the principle of utility as overriding. The act utilitarian recognizes that even though it is not possible in every instance to be sure that the course of action is not in favor of the one who acts, and that it may not be the case in every instance that we have time to weigh the action at hand. It seems odd to claim that if we did have time, if we were sure that our actions were not in favor of ourselves, and that we were sure that the action against a rule was the right one, that we should not perform an action that does not conform to a rule. Overall, this article claims that to act on a rule when we have had the chance to weigh the benefits, is to treat the rule superstitiously. We would be treating it superstitiously because we are acting as if it was an object of worship.
However, another article claims that it cannot be correct to choose act utilitarianism over rule utilitarianism because it would lead to the destruction of important social relationships, such as the family. This leads to the differences between instrumental relationships, and diffuse relationship. There are some human relationships that would collapse if the act utilitarian principle were used as the principle of action.
An example is presented about a husband and wife who discuss whether it would be to the husband's greatest benefit to leave his wife if she was ill and had little chance of regaining her health. Although this is a very insensitive example, it is concluded that a consequences of weighing the benefits is that it destroys the family, which is not of little importance or instrumental value to many people.
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.
The men and women who know war the most, are the ones who see it first hand. Turner starts his poem off with, “Nothing but hurt left here” (1). When at war, soldiers see and go through things no one could even imagine seeing. Soldiers need to be strong when in battle. They endure ridiculous circumstances, and have to stay strong and focused the entire time. Someone who does not experience these things, may not explain war the same way. As Turner goes on with his poem, he explains how he got to the point of being left with only hurt. In his poem, Turner goes through scenarios he has seen, explaining reasons for his phrase at the start of his poem. One example is when he says, “believe it when a twelve-year-old/ rolls a grenade into the room” (8-9). I know that I could never imagine that happening; let alone watching it happen. As someone who actually went through this, it is obvious that his view of war will be different than a person who never experienced that. Someone who does not experience these things, may not explain war the same way as
It can be concluded that rule utilitarianism means that an act is moral permissible if such an act conforms to a moral rule that maximises utility. Rule utilitarianism dictates that one should choose saving the life of the innocent as there is a moral rule that urges us to protect the interests of children and such a moral rule leads to utility. Although, this theory is subject to numerous of criticisms, it is still quite appealing to solving the Trolley Car Problem and any other moral-ethical
...ough its own capacity as a theory of both decision making and moral judgement, and by default- as act-utilitarianism has been proved too demanding and often immoral by our common sense intuition- I conclude that rule-utilitarianism is indeed preferable to act-utilitarianism.
Utilitarianism was initially a school of thought brought about by Jeremey Bentham throughout the late Eighteenth and early Nineteenth Centuries. John Stuart Mill would later go on to shape it closer to the form we know today. On the surface the Utilitarian way of thinking seems simple: every action must be done for the sake of the greater good. However, as one digs deeper into this notion it is clear that this cannot be achieved by relying solely on a common sense approach to life. In the following paragraphs we will explore the history of Utilitarianism and those who formed it, how it is meant to guide life, and how it is relevant to life in the Twenty-first Century.
The utilitarian faces many problems because he loses any ability to live a personal life. By this is meant that in making decisions the utilitarian must consider the steps which lead to the highest level of goodness in society. The utilitarian reaches for the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Two main aspects dominate the light of utilitarian beliefs. The consequentialist principle explains that in determining the rightness or wrongness of an act one must examine the results that will follow. The utility principle is that you can only deem something to be good if it in itself will bring upon a specific desired state, such as happiness or fulfillment. There are two types of utilitarians: Act utilitarians and Rule utilitarians. An act utilitarian believes that a person must think things through before making a decision. The only exception to this idea applies with rules of thumb; decisions that need to be made spontaneously. The right act is the one that results in the most utility. Rule utilitarians believe that an act is only deemed appropriate if it fits in line with the outline of valid rules within a system of rules that target the most favorable outcome.
Utilitarianism is an ethical system that states that one should make moral choices based on which moral option brings the most pleasure and for the most people. This system is a consequentialist one, meaning that means or actions do not matter; only the consequences or results of one’s actions determine if the choice made was morally right or wrong. Actions and decisions can only be evaluated by the results they produce. If someone’s actions result in more pain than pleasure, then that action is determined to be a morally wrong one; if an action results in the most pleasure for the most people, then it is considered morally good. This system can be hard to apply when evaluating and weighing moral options since it is a consequentialist system;
Intersectionality according to Patricia Hill Collins is the “theory of the relationship between race, gender and class” (1990), also known as the “matrix of domination” (2000). This matrix shows that there is no one way to understand the complex nature of how gender, race and class inequalities within women’s lives can be separated; for they are intertwined within each other.
There are many essays, papers and books written on the concept of right and wrong. Philosophers have theorized about moral actions for eons, one such philosopher is John Stuart Mill. In his book Utilitarianism he tries to improve on the theories of utilitarianism from previous philosophers, as he is a strong believer himself in the theory. In Mill's book he presents the ideology that there is another branch on the utilitarian tree. This branch being called rule-utilitarianism. Mill makes a distinction between two different types of utilitarianism; act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism. Rule-utilitarianism seems like a major advance over the simple theory of act-utilitarianism. But for all its added complexity, it may not actually be a significant improvement. This is proven when looking at the flaws in act-utilitarianism and relating them to the ways in which rule-utilitarianism tries to overcome them. As well one must look at the obstacles that rule-utilitarianism has on it's own as a theory. The problems of both act and rule utilitarianism consist of being too permissive and being able to justify any crime, not being able to predict the outcomes of one's actions, non-universality and the lose of freewill.
One of the major players in ethical theories has long been the concept of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism states that in general the ethical rightness or wrongness of an action is directly related to the utility of that action. Utility is more specifically defined as a measure of the goodness or badness of the consequences of an action (see quote by Mill above). For the purposes of this paper, Utility will be considered to be the tendency to produce happiness. There are two types of Utilitarianism; these are “act” and “rule”. An act utilitarian uses thought processes associated with utilitarianism (i.e. the principle of utility) to make all decisions, this requires a lot of thought and careful calculation. For example, an act utilitarian deciding from a list of possible day trips would sit down and calculate out the utility of each possible decision before coming to a conclusion as to which one was preferable. Contrary to an act utilitarian, a rule utilitarian uses the principles of utility to create a set of rules by which they live. Rule utilitarians are not incapable of calculating a decision; they just do not see a need to do it all the time. For example, a rule utilitarian might have some rules like this: in general do not kill, in general do not steal, in general do not lie; but if they found a situation that might except the rule they would do the cal...
Matilda had a lot of relationships throughout the story and each relationship affected her life. She had a friendship with a young black girl named Lavender in her class. Lavender filled all of Matilda’s friendship needs. She was smart and funny, she caused Matilda to feel affirmed and made her feel worthy. When Matilda first go to school Lavender helped her find her way and made her feel welcome. A love relationship that Matilda had was with Miss. Honey. Miss. Honey and Matilda had an agape type of love, it was compassionate and selfless. They accepted each other and respected each other. Matild risked her life to get Miss. Honey her doll and candy back from The Trunchbull, because she wanted to see Miss. Honey happy. Miss. Honey paid a visit to the Wormwood household to bring Matilda extra work because she saw how smart she is, she also asked The Trunchbull to move Matilda up a grade because she was so smart. Matilda’s family relationships were all very poor. She had a brother, a mother, and a father. All of which did not fill their responsibilities to Matilda. They have a responsibility to “comfort when family members are distressed, to take pleasure in their pleasures, to feel their pain, to raise their spirits” (DeVito). The Wormwood’s never did that for Matilda, the constantly either belittled her or ignored her completely. The relationships that Matilda had were a large part of the plot and motif of the
The moral philosophy of Utilitarianism includes a calculation of happiness, in which actions are considered to be good if they produce happiness and evil if they produce pain. Utilitarianism also considers at what extent happiness can be created not just for an individual, but also others whom may be affected. By following a Utilitarian moral philosophy, a person can assure the best possible situation for the most amounts of people affected by every action they make. Utilitarianism is the centered on happiness, as a concept, and tries to promote the idea. The vision here is that if all people seek happiness, it will result in the happiness for all humans and animals. In the case that one does not produce happiness, one should also strive to reduce unhappiness. As Utilitarianism is wholly focused on the utility of a person’s actions, it is called a “consequentialist” theory. I argue that Utilitarianism is the best moral philosophy to follow due to its versatility, ethicality, and production of happiness for all.
Utilitarianism is defined as a theory asserting that the morally right action is the one that produces the most favorable balance of good over evil. There are two major types of utilitarianism: act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism. Act-utilitarianism asserts that the morally right action is the one that directly produces the most favorable balance of good or evil. A rule-utilitarianism asserts that the morally right action is the one covered by a rule that if generally followed would produce the most favorable balance of good over evil. The difference between act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism is that act-utilitarianism is the belief that it is fine to break a rule as long as it brings a greater good, while rule-utilitarianism
This essay will show, unfortunately, that our democracy is not as healthy as it potentially could be because of television and print’s inadequate coverage of politics and the public’s resultant frustration and lack of knowledge. The reason this occurs is not because the media is trying to restrict our role in the government, but because it has other agendas to consider, such as producing maximum profits. Also, the media can take its obligatory role, often referred to as the “fourth estate,” to an extreme. John McManus, a former newspaper reporter and current professor at Santa Clara University researching the social responsibility of news media, specifically uses this term in his book Market-Driven Journalism: Let the Citizen Beware? to explain the media’s ideal role as the fourth branch of the government. The media is meant to participate in our system of checks and balances and check the government to ensure that it does not withhold too much power from the people. However, this can pose a problem if the media tries too hard to keep a check on the government and ends up transcending its role as the fourth estate and becoming cynical of the government. These market-driven characteristics and overzealous tendencies are conveyed in the media’s choice and presentation of language.
Matilda’s family is the kind of family you’d never wish to have. Her father, Harry, and mother, Zinnia, are both conceited and don’t care about anyone but themselves, except Michael of course, their son and Matilda’s older brother. He is a spoilt brat who’s mean to Matilda and who likes to cause trouble.