In this paper I will be discussing on whether or not current generations have any obligation(s) towards future generations. I will reason for why they do have certain obligations and responsibilities towards future generations in so much as preserving the environment for them and providing a sustainable future for their wellbeing. At first I am going to introduce a moral theory that will aid in explaining my topic from its point of view and objecting about it. Then I will propose certain objections to my position and respond to them accordingly, as well as an argument for my position. Finally I will end with briefly stating what I have done in the paper. Here I will be introducing the moral theory. Utilitarianism is a major moral theory in normative ethics written by John Stuart Mill. Mill bases his theory on the idea of utility, or the Greatest-Happiness Principle, which states that our actions are regarded as right so far as they increase the “collective” happiness of the world, and wrong if they decrease the “collective” happiness of the world. In general, Mill’s utilitarian theory is an impartial one since it does not regard a person’s happiness on his own; rather it focuses on the happiness of all individuals collectively. He believes that people do not have any other desires other than pleasure and all our actions lead to an end we desire (happiness). Mill describes happiness by means of pleasure and the absence of pain. So all our actions should be to maximize happiness or pleasure, and minimize pain as much as possible. Such a moral theory is a consequentialist theory since it determines whether an act is good or bad from its consequences. For example if you were to buy your friends some ice cream on a sizzling hot day, ... ... middle of paper ... ...nd so does everyone else living in the world currently. Some confusion may arise in acknowledging what obligations I have for those living in the future, but I can be sure that it is required of me to provide them with sustainable energy sources and a habitable and safe world that allows them to carry on with their lives. Simply it would be to try and give them a world which is better off than we left it. In conclusion, I have introduced the moral theory utilitarianism and used it to explain my topic, but failed to reach a suitable solution. Instead I provided arguments for and against my position and reasoned to show that I and everyone else living in the world now, do have obligations towards future generations and what those obligations might be. Hopefully we will act in accordance to those obligations and make the world a better place for our future generations.
Mill grew up under the influences from his father and Bentham. In his twenties, an indication of the cerebral approach of the early Utilitarians led to Mill’s nervous breakdown. He was influential in the growth of the moral theory of Utilitarianism whose goal was to maximize the personal freedom and happiness of every individual. Mill's principle of utility is that “actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness”. Utilitarianism is the concept that a man should judge everything based on the ability to promote happiness for the greatest number of individual. He believes that Utilitarianism must show how the conversion can be made from an interest in one’s own particular bliss to that of others. John Stuart Mill also states that moral action should not be judged on the individual case but more along the lines of “rule of thumb” and says that individuals ought to measure the outcomes and settle on their choices in view of the consequence and result that advantages the most people. Mill believes that pleasure is the only wanted consequence. Mill supposes that people are gifted with the capacity for conscious thought, and they are not happy with physical delights, but rather endeavor to accomplish the joy of the psyche too. He asserts that individuals want pleasure and reject
In Utilitarianism, J.S. Mill gives an account for the reasons one must abide by the principles of Utilitarianism. Also referred to as the Greatest-happiness Principle, this doctrine promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. More specifically, Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, holding that the right act is that which yields the greatest net utility, or "the total amount of pleasure minus the total amount of pain", for all individuals affected by said act (Joyce, lecture notes from 03/30).
Mill’s Utilitarianism varies from the most general form of utilitarianism, which claims that one should assess persons, actions, and institutions by how well they promote humans’ happiness. Mill branches off of this basic explanation by interpreting the misconceptions of utilitarianism into utility. This utility is something in opposition to pleasure. In order words, mill utilitarianism utility is the greatest happiness principle.
In utilitarianism John Stuart Mill introduced the idea of pleasures. All people seek to satisfy their desires, needs and happiness that mean prolonged and continuous pleasure. While utilitarianism is a theory directed against egoism which is opposes to the satisfaction of personal interest. The allowance of pleasure in every situation is determined by whether people contribute to the achievement of a higher purpose or general happiness. Morality is defined by Mill as rule by leading a man in his actions, through the observaing of which is delivered to all mankind the existence of the most free from suffering and intense pleasures.
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.
Other ethical questions such as “How should we- all living today evaluate the well-being of the future generations” (Brome). Scientific data shows that Global climate change will have some lasting effects on the planet, ecosystems and humans. There are many “risks associated with climate change such as the risk of pathogen, and disease” this will affect future generations, and animals this is why we should reduce our emissions of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere (Crank and Jacoby). “The consequences of heightening greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere appear after a time lag, often decades or more” (Somerville). Even though the current generations are “benefiting from cheap use of burning fossil fuels, and using the atmosphere as a free dump for our waste products” all humans are obligated to find a cleaner way to live so we don’t set future humans up for failure (Somerville). Somerville also explains that within us burning these fossil fuels, and ignoring the consequences “we sentence our children and grandchildren to cope with the resulting climate change” (Somerville). Also we need to take action to prevent further damage of Earth’s climate not only for the future children of the world but other species that we share the planet with. In the article “The Ethics of Climate Change” by John Broome he states that the answer to this ethical question can be easy one without the need of a sophisticated philosopher (Broome). He say that the answer to ethical climate change questions can be answered by simple common sense thinking (Broome). “You should not do something for your own benefit that will harm another’s” (Broome). He asks the question which is worse the death of a child in 2108 or the death of a child currently living?” (Broome). John Broome argues that we have a responsibility to
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
Utilitarianism often flies in the face of our typical intuitions. Where we generally judge an action to be moral or not in itself, utilitarianism is a consequential moral theory. An action is not inherently good or evil on its own. What makes an action morally good or morally wrong is the consequences is produces. According to John Stuart Mill, “actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.”
First, Mill’s concept of happiness is a crucial foundation to understanding Utilitarianism. According to Mill, happiness (or utility), is the maximization of pleasure and the minimization of pain (Mill 5). Mill understood that this concept of happiness or utility, could easily be misunderstood or misinterpreted; but his main purpose was to allow individuals to understand that ‘pleasure and freedom from pain, are the only things desirable as ends’ (5). This introduces the greatest happiness principle; an act is moral only if it maximizes pleasure and minimizes pain (5).
The Earth was created roughly four point six billion years ago and since modern technology, is thought to have a carrying capacity, a limit that shows how many organisms can thrive under selected conditions. It is obvious that resource use has rapidly increased over the past hundreds of years. Which led to the theory of sustainability, this involves the preservation of resources for future generations. Green living is similar to this as it promotes the conservation and wise use of natural resources. Based on this information, it is very crucial for different governments to be involved and responsible for fostering green practices and sustainable.
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...
Utilitarianism is a movement in ethics which began in the late eighteenth centaury and is primarily associated with the English philosopher Jeremy Bentham and was later adapted and fully developed by John Stuart Mill in the ninetieth century. . The theory states that we should try to achieve ‘the greatest good for the greatest number’. Utilitarianism is a teleological theory of ethics. Teleological theories of ethics look at the consequences to decide whether an action is right or wrong. Utilitarianism is defined as a doctrine that the useful is the good and that the determining consideration of right conduct should be the usefulness of it consequences: specifically: a theory that the aim of action should be the largest possible
“Unless humanity is suicidal, it should want to preserve, at the minimum, the natural life-support systems and processes required to sustain its own existence” (Daily p.365). I agree with scientist Gretchen Daily that drastic action is needed now to prevent environmental disaster. Immediate action and changes in attitude are not only necessary for survival but are also morally required. In this paper, I will approach the topic of environmental ethics from several related sides. I will discuss why the environment is a morally significant concern, how an environmental ethic can be developed, and what actions such an ethic would require to maintain and protect the environment.
I believe that we have several responsibilities towards future generations, including sustainable energy sources, managed resources, conservation, and to impart knowledge of environmental sustainability in a widespread way. I believe that must fulfill these obligations for the continuation of the human species survival in the future.