The aim of utilitarianism in general is optimal happiness, which is the only intrinsic good according to Mill. More specifically, act and rule utilitarianism differ in the manner in which they asses what will yield the greatest amount of happiness. Often, one of the objections to utilitarianism is that it is overly demanding. However, this objection that the utilitarian view is too demanding is fitting for both forms of utilitarianism, according to the Fundamentals of Ethics. In the following, I will address why utilitarianism is habitually seen as overly demanding, and I will provide a defense of utilitarianism contrary to these objections. As mentioned earlier, act and rule utilitarianism differ in the manner by which they formulate happiness and assess the morality associated with such actions. According to Smart, “act utilitarianism makes the morality of actions depend entirely on their results, requiring us always to do that action, among all available to us at the time, which will yield the greatest overall happiness” (Shafer Landau, pg. 92). More simply, if we choose the par...
The theory that I have chosen is the theory of ethical utilitarianism. Many people use this theory every day without even knowing we are using it, it’s is so natural that we don’t even think about it or wonder how we became to using it. Ethical utilitarianism is one of the many answers to the question of why an action or something is morally correct or incorrect. This is has been an ongoing question that many people have made theories towards trying to answer it and the theory of utilitarianism is the one that I think answers it the most accurately.
John Stuart Mill suggests that a person’s ethical decision-making process should be based solely upon the amount of happiness that the person can receive. Although Mill fully justifies himself, his approach lacks certain criteria for which happiness can be considered. Happiness should be judged, not only by pleasure, but by pain as well. This paper will examine Mill’s position on happiness, and the reasoning behind it. Showing where there are agreements and where there are disagreements will critique the theory of Utilitarianism. By showing the problems that the theory have will reveal what should make up ethical decision-making. John Stuart Mill supports and explains his reasoning in his book, Utilitarianism. Mill illustrates the guidelines of his theory. Mill defines utilitarianism as the quest for happiness. His main point is that one should guide his or her judgements by what will give pleasure. Mill believes that a person should always seek to gain pleasure and reject pain. Utilitarianism also states that the actions of a person should be based upon the “greatest happiness principle”. This principle states that ethical actions command the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Mill further explores the need for pleasure by noting “a being of higher faculties requires more to make him happy.” . He acknowledges that some pleasures are more alluring than others are. He adds to this by making known that when placing value in things to calculate pleasure, not only quantity important but quality as well. Mill’s criteria for happiness is easily understood, some statements that he gives are questionable. John Stuart Mill plainly laid out what he believes that the basis for ethical decision-making. First, the pursuit of pleasure is directly related to happiness. This idea can be easily accepted. It is natural for a person to focus his goals on things that will bring him pleasure. It would be absurd if someone’s goal in life was to be poor and starving. This being said, it does not mean that people are only happy due wealth but that no one’s goals are focused on poverty. Although there are many issues that can be agreeable with Mill, there are problems that exist with his theory of utilitarianism.
In the most extreme of situations, it demands the weaker person to be scarified for the greater good. Its principles, therefore, are characterized by two elements, happiness and consequentialism (Utilitarianphilosophy, 2010). These principles of utilitarianism can be applied to either particular actions or general rules, with the latter being referred to rule utilitarianism, and the former act utilitarianism (Cavalier, 1996). Harsanyi (1985, 115) states that ‘’act utilitarianism is the theory that a morally right action is one that in the existing situations will produce the highest expected social utility’’, thus it is about determining what actions brings the best results or the least amount of bad results. An example of such an act would be the assassination of a political figure, i.e. John Fitzgerald Kennedy or Martin Luther King. Rule utilitarianism, on the other hand, is ‘’the theory that a morally right action is simply an action conforming to the correct moral rule applicable to the existing situation’’ (Harsanyi 1985, 115). Thus rule utilitarianism looks at the
Utilitarianism is frequently define as “the belief that a morally good action is one that helps the greatest number of people.” Also reflected as “the greatest good with the least amount of pain.” Therefore, human beings, actions should be contingent upon the consequences. The end of all human conduct should be only happiness. Greater someone’s happiness overall generate others to have a greater happiness. So Utilitarian’s believe that the purpose of morality is to make life better by increasing the amount of good thing such as pleasure and happiness in the world and decreasing the amount of bad things such as pain and unhappiness. They also refuse mora codes that consist of commands that are based on customs, traditions, or orders given by leaders. Utilitarian’s think that what makes a morality be true or justifiable is its positive contribution to human beings.
Utilitarianism is zdefined, as the right way to act is one that maximizes your happiness, (pleasure and happiness is the absence of pain) while the wrong way is one that produces the opposite i.e. pain. Unhappiness here is defined as pain or the opposite of happiness. This is the basis of utilitarianism or what Mill calls the “greatest happiness principle” and it is the best ethical theory by which humans should follow. The argument for the above is as follows
Concerning the utilitarian philosophy, the term refers to the idea what is considered to be the greatest good for the overall population, what decision will produce the greatest good for all. In this essay, the ideas of John Stuart Mill is addressing the topic Utilitarianism, and will be presented throughout the essay. Mr. Mill goes on to argue that not only is utilitarianism seen wrongly because of the simplicity to misunderstand it 's meaning, but that human beings fail to grasp the whole of the theory. The author argues for the greatest happiness principle, Epicureans and their use of the theory, the quality and quantity of the principle, and lastly the religiousness of Utilitarianism. Though after this summary, I will make a few evaluations
The most important question of all is what should one do since the ultimate purpose of answering questions is either to satisfy curiosity or to decide which action to take. Complicated analysis is often required to answer that question. Beyond ordinary analysis, one must also have a system of values, and the correct system of values is utilitarianism.
The different types of Utilitarianism make it easier to live by, yet it is hard not to let our emotions override our actions. Despite the many flaws in the theory, it is simple and easy to apply.
Although both an act-utilitarian and a rule-utilitarian, both defend the utilitarianism main claim of us doing “what is optimific. [Meaning] we must maximize overall well-being,” (FE, 138). The main claim of each form is different.
Utilitarianism is consequentialist ethical system that focuses on the results of actions, rather than the actions themselves. Utilitarian ethics, attributed to Jeremy Bentham, also argue that humans are naturally driven to seek pleasure and avoid pain. Therefore, in utilitarian ethics, just actions are those that maximize happiness, utility, and minimize unhappiness. Utilitarian ethics also argue that happiness must be maximized for the greatest number of people, rather than focusing on the individual pursuit of pleasure. Utilitarianisms strengths lie in its societal applications, allowing decision making bodies that benefit large groups, rather than looking purely individualistically. It also offers a stronger justification if one accepts the base principle that happiness is universally better than unhappiness. One of the main difficulties in applying utilitarian ethics is the challenge of quantifying happiness. It is impossible to empirically measure happiness. Utilitarianism also opens itself to hypotheticals that yield unpleasant results. Under pure utilitarianism, if it would increase the safety, and therefore happiness, of a society to torture or kill innocents suspected of a crime, it would follow that such action was ethically just. Subsequent utilitarians have offered more nuanced versions of the hedonic calculus and ideas of rule utilitarianism that look at overall moral rules
As human beings, we often have desires that are not always consistent with yielding the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. Utilitarianism would argue that putting one’s own desires first and pursuing one’s own interests is wrong and immoral behavior. While some moral theories acknowledge that pursuing one’s own interests can be morally optional, in Utilitarianism, it is always forbidden (Moral Theory, p. 135). This makes the theory overly demanding because one is constantly forced to consider others. Utilitarians can respond to this objection by challenging the claim that pursuing one’s own desires cannot ever be consistent with the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. Certainly there can be times when pursuing one’s own desires is also consistent with producing the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. Utilitarians might also point out that moral theories are meant to be demanding because they are teaching individuals how to act morally and acting morally is not always the desirable course of
Act utilitarians consider all the consequences of a specific action, and they argue that the act that results in the greatest net ‘good’ is the moral choice. Rule utilitarians believe that there are rules which, if followed by everyone would increase good outcomes. In this belief system, sometimes a particular act could have the best possible consequences in a situation, but it may not be the moral choice if it involves breaking a rule. Rule utilitarians would argue that if everyone broke the rule, the overall outcome would be worse. Therefore, even if breaking the rule would have better consequences in one instance, it is still better to follow the rule, for the greatest net good.
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...
Utilitarian theory of property whole persuasive and relevant, leaves many unanswered questions and seems to address only one side of maximizing the utility of property.
Philosopher and economist Jeremy Bentham decides to mix math with philosophy to what is now known as utilitarianism. Bentham’s goal is to provide happiness. This theory works to an extent, but then goes downhill. The reason Bentham’s theory is so complicated to understand is that it needs to get fixed by his student. His student John Stewart Mill tries to fix the difference between pain and pleasure. With the theory sort of fix people by Stewart Mill people still find it hard to understand how the theory actually works. Utilitarianism is the most inappropriate moral theory because it looks directly at the “cause and effect” relationship of our actions. In this essay I will argue that utilitarianism isn’t a good ethical theory and how it fails