Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
An essay about sacrifice
An essay about sacrifice
The importance of sacrifice in life
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: An essay about sacrifice
In moral philosophy, preferentism - or desire satisfactionism - is the idea that the fulfilment of preferences is the sole basic bearer of intrinsic goodness, and the frustration of preferences is the sole basic bearer of intrinsic badness. Simply, getting what you desire most is good, not getting that is bad. The source of value is not the pleasure gained by getting what you want; rather the fulfilment of the desire as an end in itself. This view came about as an alternative to traditional hedonism, especially after Nozick's Experience Machine showed that most people would not choose not to be most efficiently pleasured through the machine, and therefore we should look to things other than pleasure as sources of value.
Mark Overvold (1980) argues that preferentist theories of value have trouble accommodating the view that agents can deliberately choose to perform actions that can be described as self-sacrifice. This essay will examine Overvold's article, and explain the problems that preferentism has with the idea of self-sacrifice.
The idea of self-sacrifice seems relatively common-sense to most of us: we forgo some current potential good in order to maximise either the good of someone we care about, or our own later good. Richard Brandt (1972) includes altruistic desires in his definition of self-interest: "if I really desire the happiness of my daughter, or the discomfiture of my department chairman ... then getting that desire satisfied ... counts as being an enhancement of my utility or welfare ... to an extent corresponding to how strongly I want that outcome." The key point here is that by this definition of self-interest, an altruistic act must have a number of conditions in order to be classed as self-sacrifice. Ove...
... middle of paper ...
...act which is such that (a) if the consequences of the alternative had been as the agent expected them to be, then the alternative would have been more in the agent's self-interest than the act he actually did perform, and (b) if the agent had chosen to perform the alternative act, then his act would have been more in his self-interest, objectively, than the act which he actually did perform.
Having then established a definition of self-sacrifice, he returns to the discussion of self-interest. "Any act which satisfies the first two conditions of self-sacrifice (i.e., the loss is anticipated, and the act is voluntary) would thereby satisfy Brandt's definition of 'self-interest'" . The
The problem with combining the Overvold's well defined conception of self-sacrifice with Brandt's account of self-interest is that the two ideas are inherently contradictory.
In Utilitarianism For and Against by Bernard Williams, Williams has an argument that is based on the value of integrity. Integrity is defined as the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles or moral uprightness. In Williams argument he believes in certain circumstances utilitarianism requires agents to abandon their personal projects and commitments. This lead Williams to claim that utilitarianism is an attack on an agent’s integrity. In my essay I will explain Williams’s argument on utilitarianism and how he is lead to believe it is an attack on an agent’s integrity. I will also explain why he thinks it can force us to abandon our personal projects. Within my essay I will also explain the theory of right conduct explained by Timmons in the book Moral Theory. I will also explain the notions of personal responsibility explained by Williams, as well as the notion of personal projects and commitments and the notion of integrity.
The Virtue, Utilitarianism, and Deontological concepts all have something in a common. Each one of these three concepts concentrates on an individual’s actions leading to various options, in addition to how the options affected others. The variations within each of these concepts are who engaged and was impacted by those options. The Virtue concept concentrates on an individual's character. One could stay in their lifestyle by seeking quality in everything they and others do (Boylan, 2009). The Utilitarianism concept considers that an activity, which is created to the advantage of a team, is fairly appropriate, if it delivers the biggest advantage to that team (Boylan, 2009). Utilitarianism is frequently known through the motto, “The biggest excellent for the biggest variety (Boylan, 2009).” between the three theories, Deontology is the most different. This concept moves around ones choice to control. Deontologists create options depending on understanding that something is right without concern to the higher excellent of others (Boylan, 2009).
An example of this that is related to my life is how my mother had a choice: either take care of me, specifically be my mother, but lose a great deal of her opportunities or say, “I’m not their real mother, I don’t have an obligation to raise them.” but instead, she said, “I love these children and I only want the best for them. Also, I believe it is in the best interest of the children that they have a mother to raise them up to be kind people in this chaotic world.” Her decision lead to several years sacrificed, which I find quite touching the heart; therefore, I could only try to be the best I can be while remaining grateful at the same time being the source of her pride. The characters in “The Gift of the Magi” sacrificed something that is important to them to sell it for money to buy the person they love a gift that would be important to
...ticipation correlate directly with the correct practice of “self-interest rightly understood” and we accept both Michael Sandel’s thesis about the rise of the “voluntarist self” and Robert Putnam’s thesis describing the decline of American social and political capital—then a gloomy picture emerges about the sustainability of virtue in the hands of enlightened self-interest alone. Without guidance in a wide expanse of interstitial space, it is easy to slip through the cracks.
Altruism regards the individual life as something one may be required to sacrifice for the sake of
When we watch any military motion pictures or documentaries we perceive that youthful troopers are taught that they ought to be prepared to give up their life whenever for their country. What does self-sacrifice actually mean? It’s an ability to willingly give up something good for something better. Envision a soldier fighting in the war where he has to establish a hard decision which includes either to relinquish his life to spare thousand different lives or be narrow minded and let others bite the dust. What do we anticipate from the soldier? Nearly all of the people will concur that he will give his life, and it’s true that he will as it’s his task to defend his nation. It’s not a child’s play to sacrifice happiness and spirit; one requires a large deal of strength and courage to act thus. Mot of the savants believes that one can’t evaluate the strength of someone by merely expecting at their physique, only by the readiness of self-sacrificing themselves for the betterment of others. In the movie Lord Of The Rings: The Fellowship Of The Ring directed by Peter Jackson, the main character Frodo Baggins, his companions Marry and Pippin and a wise wizard Gandalf self-sacrificed their comfort, serenity and life in order to successfully complete their quest and to stop Sauron from crushing the Middle Earth. Sometimes individuals face compelling circumstances in their lives where they need to make life altering choices. The film proposes that by the act of self-sacrifice one can achieve internal strength that may have never existed before.
the agent could not do it otherwise in any way then how he is morally responsible for whatever
To sum up, looking upon the term self-interest, people not only need to separate its concept with selfishness, but also have to
A possible objection to my critique could be that “Although human beings may reserve the right to care about themselves it is egocentric, and not in the best interest for humanity.” The objection to my criticism could extend to even say that “By putting yourself interest ahead of others, you are indeed implying that you are the center of the universe or at least your own universe.” Yes, it is indeed the humane thing to do to put the best interest of others ahead of your own. But humans are not, and should not, forced to put the greater good ahead of their own life. This question is raised commonly in contemporary politics. In my opinion it is the individual’s choice if they so choose to donate time, money or any other resources to those in need. This decision should not be inflicted upon them. This ties back to Wolf’s original statement that “If you care about yourself you’re living as if you’re the center of the universe, which is false.” It is incongruous to believe that if you care about yourself you’re automatically implying that you are the center of the universe. Everyone who functions in society and is a normal human being, to a certain extent, cares about them self, which in my personal opinion is a good
This paper shows that altruism is a very complex issue and much more information could be introduced, following this would allow a greater look at the complexity of other views such as the religious or the philosophical side. Garrett Hardin’s ‘lifeboat ethics’ is a perfect example and proof of this paper, showing that we would rather let others gets killed instead of trying to help a
This is an act based on maximizing one’s own utility, even if it is merely in his own mind. To those for whom morality and helping the greater good is important, altruistic acts exist even it is within the category of selfish acts. Thus, Hobbes’ theory concerning actions based solely on self-serving motivations is not truly complete.
The principle of utility influences people to act on the wrong terms and encourages its followers to make decisions solely based on what produces the best results. Consequentialists, Jeremy Bentham and John Stewart Mill believe that it doesn’t matter why a person does something or what motivates them to do so; but rather they think that the outcome is the most important factor in decision making. These two Utilitarian philosophers concluded that the greatest form of good in society was happiness, and that the absence of pain and the presence of pleasure should always be one’s number one priority and ultimately always one’s end goal. Encouraging members
... which the act is done does matter to them. Utilitarianism is very vulnerable in this regard. A case where some people’s happiness is created at the cost of a few may not always be ethical. Opposition may say that “Someone always is left out in this theory” but I argue that this is always the case.
The difference is that the values the sacrifice centers on are entirely the other end of the spectrum. The person in my life who has also gone to great lengths to sacrifice is my Mom. She has said that for as long as she can remember, that one of the things that she was always sure she wanted in her life was children. This, obviously, got fulfilled, as she got married at only twenty one and soon had my brother and I. For her entire life, as a stay at home mom, she sacrificed everything for us and our family, losing friendships due to the time she had to spend with us, taking on gruesome jobs, and most of all, sacrificing her time. Day in and day out she's spent 24/7 using the time she will never get back to raise us the best she could. This time is something that is irreparable, but my Mom's values were what gave her the capacity to make this immense self-sacrifice. In contrast to what Julia did, my Mom chose to pursue her family and that child-to-mother connection over what would be seen by the commoner as her "greater purpose" and meaning in life. To Julia it was the fight against Nazism, to my Mom it would have been her passion for music. For the past eighteen years, she has put music on the back of the shelf (much like Julia put her daughter on the back of the self over the border) and set us as her priority. Now, with her kids almost ready to leave the nest, she is able to start picking up music
Identify the nature of this social choices. If people are unhappy about the outcome of markets, Markets are not in the wrong. They are Pareto optimal, therefor should not be tinkered with. Society should make decisions on the justice of distribution of society 's legacy, not how to fix markets Moral hazard. The tendency towards a person (the agent) who is imperfectly monitored by the principal to engage in dishonest or otherwise undesirable behavior. Can be reduced by delayed payment, high wages, or better