Weaknesses Of Act Consequentialism

1491 Words3 Pages

Act-consequentialism is a moral theory that maintains what is right is whatever brings about the best consequences impartially considering. The main and most renowned form of act-consequentialism is act utilitarianism which advocates agents choosing the moral path that creates the greatest good for the greatest number, this being the most widely known form of act-consequentialism is the moral theory that I shall be concentrating on though out my discussion. Impartiality is the notion that everybody should count for one and nobody more than one, which is often considered to be a “double-edged sword” (Jollimore, 2017) meaning there is debate as to whether impartiality is a strength or weakness of the theory. Throughout my essay I attempt to point out an important misunderstanding made by theories that uphold impartiality as a weakness of act-consequentialism and how this could lead to the view that impartiality is in fact a strength of both act utilitarianism and act consequentialism.
One claim that is made regarding impartiality as a weakness of …show more content…

Mill explains that even the most virtuous agents’ interests will not move any further than the individuals concerned (Jollimore, 2017) and so it looks as if no radical commitments must be made. One can still maintain their own lives, not having to give up everything in order to pledge their lives to improving the lives of those less fortunate. Therefore, it is the case that critics conceive of impartiality casing act consequentialist theories because they make a fundamental misunderstanding regarding the nature of the impartiality. If it is taken to mean as Mill intended, then fewer changes will need to be made than first implied and so it does not seem as demanding as made

Open Document