Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Utilitarianism principles essay
The theory of utilitarianism
The theory of utilitarianism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Utilitarianism principles essay
In an age where humanity realizes the differences between right and wrong, and ponders why they choose whichever side they do, utilitarianism provides and answer. The principle of Utilitarianism as written by J.S. Mills can be summed up in his precise language, ‘actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.’ Essentially, the morally correct action is the action that produces the most happiness, and the action that produces unhappiness is the morally incorrect action, and that this is the basis for morality. For example, if you have 20 dollars to spend and you have the option to either buying yourself an ice cream cone or not spending your money, the action that provides …show more content…
Let’s say that buying the ice cream cone will increase your utility by an arbitrary value of 5 whereas saving your money will increase utility by 4. In this scenario, the action that provides you the most utility is buying the ice cream cone, as it will increase your happiness more than not spending your money. Net utility is also applicable, as if buying ice cream would give you 5 arbitrary units of happiness but buying ice cream for 3 others would give them each 2 units of happiness, the morally correct action would be to buy the others ice cream as they achieve the highest net utility from this. Another aspect of utilitarianism is the difference between higher and lower pleasures. While in the previous example, a quantitative measurement of utilitarianism was useful, Mills on the whole rejects a quantitative measurement of utility because he recognizes that some forms of pleasure that provide happiness are different than others. The happiness gained from learning a new language cannot be quantitatively measured against the happiness of going shopping or traveling. Mills then goes on to argue that humans are creatures that would choose higher quality pleasures over lower quality pleasures; lower quality pleasures being the desire for food and …show more content…
George has a PhD in chemistry and is finding it difficult to find a job. He is not in the best health, which limits the kinds of jobs he can take. He has young children that need taking care off but his wife is working to support them, which causes more strain on his family. One of George’s older colleagues tells George that he can get him a decently paying job in a laboratory; however this laboratory specializes in chemical and biological warfare, which is against George 's moral code. George wishes to not take the job, but his friend tells him that if George turns down the job, it will go to another colleague of theirs. George’s friend is concerned because this other colleague truly believes in the work of the laboratory and will pursue his research with a greater passion than George, potentially causing the creation of new chemical and biological weapons. The question remains, what should George
For more than two thousand years, the human race has struggled to effectively establish the basis of morality. Society has made little progress distinguishing between morally right and wrong. Even the most intellectual minds fail to distinguish the underlying principles of morality. A consensus on morality is far from being reached. The struggle to create a basis has created a vigorous warfare, bursting with disagreement and disputation. Despite the lack of understanding, John Stuart Mill confidently believes that truths can still have meaning even if society struggles to understand its principles. Mill does an outstanding job at depicting morality and for that the entire essay is a masterpiece. His claims throughout the essay could not be any closer to the truth.
The second classic criticism of Utilitarian Principle is that Mill’s dichotomy of higher and lower pleasures create the need to calculate the happiness derived from each category of pleasures. This has left critics asking “Is a dissatisfied Socrates better off than a satisfied fool?” In response, Mill says that people learn to distinguish physical (or lower) pleasures from mental (or higher) pleasures with training. We possess the tendency to favor the higher pleasures, as we are human beings rather than mere
John Stuart Mills is a philosopher who is strongly associated with utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a philosophy which puts morality in the greater good. Often associated with sigma, the summation of benefit is the only determinant of what makes something morally right. In Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mills compares his form of utilitarianism with the Golden Rule of Jesus of Nazareth which states, “To do as you would be done by” and “To love your neighbor as yourself.” Mills states that these statements constitute the ideal perfection of utilitarian morality. The utilitarian morality as described previously is one where everyone acts in utility. This is so that the maximum amount of happiness can be attained which would satisfies everyone’s
The utilitarian ethics theory in a nutshell basically states that “the good is the well-being of all, impartially considered (Riley 68).” What is emphasized in utilitarian theory is that the greatest good be produced for the greatest number of people. This brings up the question of what “good” actually is. Many utilitarian theorists believe there are two kinds of good, intrinsic and instrumental. Intrinsic good is good considered just by itself while all other things are instruments for gaining the intrinsic goods (Schinzinger 55). Mill believes that the only intrinsic good is happiness and thus the emphasis can be rewritten as the greatest happiness produced for the greatest number of people. In other words, happiness is basically the only thing desirable as an end in itself. However, once again we ask the question of what happiness really is. When explaining his utilitarian theory, Mill separates happiness into two types, the higher and the lower (Mill Ch.2). Mill defines the higher happiness as being that of humans including such qualities as justice, creativity, morality and nobility. On the other hand, the lower happiness is that which is associated with animals and is purely pleasure based. Using these two types of happiness, Riley c...
The problem with Utilitarianism is not that it seeks to maximize happiness. Rather, it is that Utilitarianism is so fixated on generating the most happiness that the need to take into account the morality of the individual actions that constitute the result is essentially eradicated. In so doing, the possibility of committing unethical actions in the name of promoting the general welfare is brought about, which in turn, renders Utilitarianism an inadequate ethical
Mill's Utilitarianism When faced with a moral dilemma, utilitarianism identifies the appropriate considerations, but offers no realistic way to gather the necessary information to make the required calculations. This lack of information is a problem both in evaluating the welfare issues and in evaluating the consequentialist issues which utilitarianism requires be weighed when making moral decisions. Utilitarianism attempts to solve both of these difficulties by appealing to experience; however, no method of reconciling an individual decision with the rules of experience is suggested, and no relative weights are assigned to the various considerations. In deciding whether or not to torture a terrorist who has planted a bomb in New York City, a utilitarian must evaluate both the overall welfare of the people involved or effected by the action taken, and the consequences of the action taken. To calculate the welfare of the people involved in or effected by an action, utilitarianism requires that all individuals be considered equally.
Utilitarianism provides a method for calculating the moral worth of specific actions in terms of their consequences. Utilitarianism teaches that happiness comprises the fundamental purpose and pursuit of human life. Therefore, the value and worth of any given action should be evaluated in terms of its ability to produce happiness. The utilitarian defines happiness as pleasure and the absence of pain, and teaches that in all cases individuals should act in such a way as to achieve the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people. Utilitarianism...
“Utilitarianism is the creed which accepts as the foundations of morals utility of the greatest happiness principle holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” (Mil, 90). Utilitarianism ethics is based on the greatest good for the greatest number meaning that the moral agent does what he/she thinks will be
In utilitarianism the common goal is to create the most happiness for the most amount of people. Mills definition of the Greatest Happiness Principle “holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (540) If this principle is the case then as a utilitarian your actions of good should promote the most happiness. This way of thinking can really produce some wrong answers and actions to moral questions. For example, say you and your family are starving and in need of food. The only possible way to get food would be to steal it. In general society finds it morally wrong to steal under any circumstances. But as utilitarian you have to ask, would my actions of stealing food promote the most happiness for the most people. You need to take into account the people you are making happy and the people you are hurting. On one hand, you would be promoting happiness for you and your and entire family, and on the other hand, you would be hurting the storeowner by stealing some of his revenue. Utilitarian ideas tell you that you should steal the food because your actions are promoting happiness and the absence of pain for the least amount of people. There are other examples I found when doing some research like doctors going against morals to save more sick people by letting one healthy person die
The main principle of utilitarianism is the greatest happiness principle. It states that, "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure" (Mill, 1863, Ch. 2, p330). In other words, it results with the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people that are involved.
John Stuart Mill claims that people often misinterpret utility as the test for right and wrong. This definition of utility restricts the term and denounces its meaning to being opposed to pleasure. Mill defines utility as units of happiness caused by an action without the unhappiness caused by an action. He calls this the Greatest Happiness Principle or the Principle of Utility. Mill’s principle states that actions are right when they tend to promote happiness and are wrong when they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. Happiness is defined as intended pleasure and the absence of pain while unhappiness is defined as pain and the lack of pleasure. Therefore, Mill claims, pleasure and happiness are the only things desirable and good. Mill’s definition of utilitarianism claims that act...
Utilitarianism defined, is the contention that a man should judge everything based on the ability to promote the greatest individual happiness. In other words Utilitarianism states that good is what brings the most happiness to the most people. John Stuart Mill based his utilitarian principle on the decisions that we make. He says the decisions should always benefit the most people as much as possible no matter what the consequences might be. Mill says that we should weigh the outcomes and make our decisions based on the outcome that benefits the majority of the people. This leads to him stating that pleasure is the only desirable consequence of our decision or actions. Mill believes that human beings are endowed with the ability for conscious thought, and they are not satisfied with physical pleasures, but they strive to achieve pleasure of the mind as well.
This principle of Utilitarianism strives to answer the question, regarding to any moral standard, is “What are the motives to follow such moral standards?”. An individual is deemed moral when their actions advocate the benefit of the public, according to the greatest happiness principle. Mills believed that the foundation of morals was in fact utility and defined it as ‘happiness with the absence of pain’. The principle helps us define the controversial phrases right, wrong, happiness and unhappiness in the most basic of terms. A choice or action is ‘right’ when it promotes happiness and considered ‘wrong’ if it encourages the opposite of happiness. While happiness is defined as state when there is pleasure present, but the absence of pain and unhappiness is quite the contrary it is pain with lack of pleasure being present, also knowing as suffering. According to Mills the central issue with ethical theory is the question of the supreme good or ultimate end and this argument is designed to express that the maximum happiness is the ultimate moral good. Now that it is understood the principle of the greatest good helps answers a question of moral
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that approaches moral questions of right and wrong by considering the actual consequences of a variety of possible actions. These consequences are generally those that either positively or negatively affect other living beings. If there are both good and bad actual consequences of a particular action, the moral individual must weigh the good against the bad and go with the action that will produce the most good for the most amount of people. If the individual finds that there are only bad consequences, then she must go with the behavior that causes the least amount of bad consequences to the least amount of people. There are many different methods for calculating the utility of each moral decision and coming up with the best
On the other hand, when determining the morality of the act of giving money, John Stuart Mill’s utilitarian ethical theory would focus on consequences as well as two main components: deriving highest pleasure and avoiding pain for the majority (Mill 8). Mill argues, “He who saves a fellow creature from drowning does what is morally right, whether his motive be duty or the hope of being paid for his trouble” (Mill 18). Through this example, John Stuart Mill describes the importance of consequences, rather than motive in determining whether an act is ethical. Without two varying options to act upon, one could not be ethical because the consequence of the action is what causes it to become ethical.