Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Mill's definition of utilitarianism
Summary of aristotle virtue of ethics
Summary of aristotle virtue of ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Mill's definition of utilitarianism
Imagine coming home one day after school and going to fix a glass of ice cold water. However, when you turn on the water faucet you first see brown water, and then you smell a disgusting aroma. In my paper I will incorporate Mill’s and Aristotle’s views on the Flint Water Crisis. I will use Mill’s view on utility judgement to refute Governor Snyder’s decision, and the use of his business methods. There will be a detailed timeline to illustrate the situations that led to the Flint Water Crisis. I am going to explain some reasons why Mill’s Utilitarianism is an efficient way for government to understand its ethics. Is it possible for an action that makes you happy mean less compared to an action that will make the society happy? In this essay …show more content…
The need in this instance was healthy water. “For though this good is the same for the individual and the state, yet the good of the state seems a grander and more perfect thing both to attain and to secure; and glad as one would be to do this service for a single individual. To do it for a people and for a number of states is nobler and more divine (The Nicomachean Ethics pg. 64).” Aristotle wants us all to aim for happiness, but there are exceptions to his Governor Snyder was not focused on wealth in terms of money. “For it (wealth) is merely useful as a means to something else (The Nicomachean Ethics pg. 67).” He was focused on wealth in terms of prestige, honor, and political superiority. There has to be rules for government officials that prohibits them from hurting the people they work for. Aristotle would say that Governor Snyder was putting the wealth as the end and not happiness. “Happiness seems more than anything else to answer to the description for we always choose it for itself, and never for the sake of something else; while honor and pleasure… we choose for the sake of happiness (The Nicomachean Ethics pg.
The water crisis in Flint Michigan began as early as was as April of 2014. The crisis is concerning a small town called Flint, located at the bottom right of michigan were the majority of the population is African American. The issue began when the town 's water supply witch in past use to come from the detroit river water supply was switched over to the Flint river water supply. People soon began to complain about the taste, smell, and color of the tap water, and of symptoms such as hair loss and rashes from bathing in the water. Even though there were many signs that the water was indeed contaminated, such as when a General Motors plant in Flint stopped using municipal water in October of 2014, claiming that it corroded car parts, the government officials stated that the water was not a threat to the public 's health and safety. However it was later revealed that the water was in fact unhealthy, and contained too much lead. The issue was brought to the eyes of the public when Lee Anne Walters, a Flint resident. This mother of four had seen her family suffer from various alarming symptoms, including abdominal pains, hair loss, and rashes; she also has a son who showed signs of developmental problems. She decided to switch her family to bottled water, and the symptoms abated. Finally, in February of 2015, she demanded that the city test the tap water. A federal investigation was launched and the results came back shocking. The water was extremely toxic containing 400 parts per billion of lead. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), there is no safe level of lead in drinking water, but the maximum allowed by law is 15 parts per billion. Virginia Tech professor and engineer Marc Edwards, an expert on municipal w...
Ending homelessness will be a huge challenge for Flint/Genesee County just like it will be for the rest of the U.S (Walker S & Hutchison, n.d). This is because of the economic conditions that continue to decline while communities struggle with increased unemployment, dilapidated housing and shortage of affordable housing. Flint/Genesee County faces a crisis because of the declining job markets as a result of jobs that are either closing or relocating, which include Delphi or General Motors plants, which are located in the county. Unemployment remains one of the main causes of homelessness. Other causes include lack of harmonization in the discharge policy between the county and the state, insufficient affordable and safe housing, cuts in funding, local government’s lack of commitment and decline in available private resources have also contributed greatly. 30% of all the housing stock in the City of Flint is in rundown condition.
The struggle between happiness and society shows a society where true happiness has been forfeited to form a perfect order.
Society pressure themselves to be happy; they often ask questions like, “does that make you happy?” What they fail to understand is that sometimes doing the right thing, for the moment, might not seem to bring happiness in one’s life, but after trekking the ups and downs of life, happiness might be waiting on the other side. From time to time people also judge good and bad through happiness. “If something is good, we feel good. If something is
In conclusion, Aristotle’s elucidation of happiness is based on a ground of ethics because happiness to him is coveted for happiness alone. The life of fame and fortune is not the life for Aristotle. Happiness is synonymous for living well. To live well is to live with virtue. Virtue presents humans with identification for morals, and for Aristotle, we choose to have “right” morals. Aristotle defines humans by nature to be dishonored when making a wrong decision. Thus, if one choses to act upon pleasure, like John Stuart Mill states, for happiness, one may choose the wrong means of doing so. Happiness is a choice made rationally among many pickings to reach this state of mind. Happiness should not be a way to “win” in the end but a way to develop a well-behaved, principled reputation.
In this paper I will argue that Utilitarianism is a weak argument. According to John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism is defined as the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Happiness is pleasure and absence of pain (Mill, 114). At first glance the Utility perspective seems logical, however it often conflicts with justice and morality. I will begin by presenting the idea that good consequences do not always determine the right thing to do. Then I will provide the counterargument that utilitarians can bite the bullet. Next I will explain that Utilitarianism is too demanding for anyone to live by, and finally provide the counterarguments from the Utilitarianism perspective.
In conclusion, i don’t think that we are happy. I think that most people just say they are happy but are actually discontent. The people I talked about in this essay show that today in our world we are not very happy. It is kind of scary to find out that you have to question if you are really happy. So ask yourself right now if you think you are happy, or are you actually sad inside.
Cahn, Steven M., and Peter J. Markie. "John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism; Chapter 2: What Utilitarianism Is." 2009. Ethics: History, Theory, and Contemporary Issues. 4th ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2009. 330-41. Print.
William James once said that “Action may not bring happiness but there is no happiness without action." Everyone living in a society we live in today are putting in efforts to obtain happiness. Many individuals will pursue that happiness while others will compromise it. To achieve happiness, everyone has their own methods, but sometimes it will not work, when you realize you can’t always have what you want. In the text To Kill A Mockingbird and the Shakespearean play Romeo and Juliet, Harper Lee and Shakespeare developed the idea that every individual pursue or compromise happiness differently because we have different beliefs and values that shapes our identities. Compromise can seem like a negative thing, but in some situations it is crucial to happiness. It is not possible to always everything you want in life but the desire of pursuing happiness provide individuals with more satisfaction than compromising happiness.
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.
In his essay, Utilitarianism Mill elaborates on Utilitarianism as a moral theory and responds to misconceptions about it. Utilitarianism, in Mill’s words, is the view that »actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.«1 In that way, Utilitarianism offers an answer to the fundamental question Ethics is concerned about: ‘How should one live?’ or ‘What is the good or right way to live?’.
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.
Happiness is not easy to define. A good life has one characteristic – happiness. Happiness can be defined as pleasure, joy, contentment and satisfaction. Understandings of how to be happy were changing throughout the history. Aristotle who lived in 4th century BC in Athens and Schopenhauer who is19th century philosopher from Germany have contrasting understanding of happiness. In this essay I will argue that Aristotle and Schopenhauer provide accounts of happiness that are useful to contemporary society. The reason for this is that happiness is universal and people’s ways to achieve it did not changed tremendously over times.
As of this year, nearly 1.1 billion people live without clean drinking water and 2.6 billion live without adequate water sanitation. The McDonald's down the street, however, will sell you a 1/3 pounder burger for only 150 gallons. Changes in lifestyle can easily reduce this number and help not only save water, but money as well. Currently, with our diminishing water supply, one of the main goals of humanitarian organizations is ensuring that everyone has the right and equality to water. With global access to water, it reduces the responsibility for political tension between countries fighting to literally stay alive.
Aristotle argues that being happy is also being good. Once you have achieved happiness that is the end, and because it is something final it should be where all actions aim. Aristotle says that this is a truism, meaning that of course we should always aim to be happy because it is supreme good. The idea behind this links back to virtue and why being virtuous leads to happiness. Each individual has different abilities and skills which will lead to their own specific type of happiness. Happiness does not come in the same form for everybody, but ultimately when one is excellent at what they do, they will achieve happiness. In this paper, I will explain why the virtuous life is the equivalent of the happy life.