Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Impact of ethics on society
The importance of utilitarianism
Effects of utilitarianism ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Impact of ethics on society
British philosopher Bentham used felicific, or utility calculus to describe pleasure as “the only intrinsic good”, and pain as immoral. To illustrate, surgeon B applies Bentham’s moral arithmetic; and in a scale of one to ten, she assigns number nine to the pleasure derived from saving lives in a hospital, and number five to the pleasure of going to the opera and enjoying classical music. Bentham’s formula imply that all pleasures can be quantified and calculated with real numbers. However, if all pleasures can be quantified, then humans can easily attempt to equate two quantities to favor one specific act. How much needs to be done in situation A to equal the same amount of pleasure produced in situation B? In reality, Bentham’s theory leads …show more content…
The term desirable in his proof shows that humans tend to seek what is intrinsically good like pleasure and happiness; however, desirable could also mean simply desiring anything else like robbing a bank. In this case, the act of stealing is immoral to begin with because it does not promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. A second case for surgeon B, what if she is acquainted with a healthy person with no one to miss him, and there are four patients desperately require organ transplants. The greatest happiness principle require that she accepts murder as a way to save the four lives instead of one because her act will promote the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. Now, the act of murder is immoral regardless of circumstance because ultimately harvesting organs in such manners will lead to societal disorder, fear, and unhappiness among the majority of people. Utilitarianism hold that it is impermissible to cause pain just for the sake of pain; meanwhile, it is permissible to cause pain for the sake of greater …show more content…
The practice of coal-mining negatively impacts the health and livelihood of all individuals, directly and indirectly. Science provided better tools and methods to find healthier resources and energy to decrease air pollution, global warming, and provide much greater and stable employment opportunities. The long-term effects promote the greatest amount of happiness on the greatest amount of people. Also, animals have natural tendency to seek pleasure, happiness, and protection; and experience pain. The rule of minimizing pain and increasing happiness apply to humans and other animals since it focuses on natural animalistic claims. Does this mean that omnivores and carnivores should feel guilty? As long as the act produces greater amount of happiness than the amount of pain, using animals while bearing in mind their intrinsic rights is
Timothy Brook’s book, The Confusions of Pleasure: Commerce and Culture in Ming China is a detailed account of the three centuries of the Ming Dynasty in China. The book allows an opportunity to view this prominent time period of Chinese history. Confusions of Pleasure not only chronicles the economic development during the Ming dynasty, but also the resulting cultural and social changes that transform the gentry and merchant class. Brook’s insights highlight the divide between the Ming dynasty’s idealized beliefs, and the realities of its economic expansion and its effects. Brook describes this gap through the use of several first hand accounts of individuals with various social statuses.
As humans we are constantly in search of understanding the balance between what feels good and what is right. Humans try to take full advantage of experiencing pleasure to its fullest potential. Hedonism claims that pleasure is the highest and only source of essential significance. If the notion of hedonism is truthful, happiness is directly correlated with pleasure. Robert Nozick presented the philosophical world with his though experiment, “The Experience Machine” in order to dispute the existence and validity of hedonism. Nozick’s thought experiment poses the question of whether or not humans would plug into a machine which produces any desired experience. Nozick weakens the notion of hedonism through his thought experiment, claiming humans need more than just pleasure in their lives. Nozick discovers that humans would not hook up to this machine because they would not fully develop as a person and consider it a form of suicide.
The case under study is of the surgeon who has to decide killing of a normal, but unjust person for the sake of saving five sick people. An act utilitarian in this case would be considering every probable consequences of sacrificing the sixth normal patient while on the other hand, a rule utilitarian will possibly look for the consequences associated with performing such an operation every time a situation like thos would arise. One of the potential rules would claim that: whenever any surgeon can kill one healthy person for the basic purpose of transplanting his organs to save more than one person who actually needs them, then he can surely do it.
In the history of ethics there are three principal standards of conduct, each of which has been proposed as the highest good: happiness or pleasure; du...
However, this creates a conflict of morality. He comes to the conclusion that there is a flaw with utilitarianism unless we completely change the parameters. By doing so, killing one person to save two, and doing so on a regular basis would be okay. He uses the example that Y and Z are dying. Y needs a heart transplant. X needs a lung transplant. If a recently deceased person were a donor, Y and Z can be saved. Y and Z then ask, Why don 't we just kill a suitable donor? The medical procedures to save Y and Z are available, and in other medical treatments, a doctor 's failure to provide the service would be regarded as equivalent to killing the two patients. So, by not killing an innocent "donor" for the necessary heart and lungs, the doctor chooses to kill Y and Z. Harris proposes objections to killing one to save two and in the end, the Survival Lottery comes out of it. The survival lottery puts everyone on an even playing field for being chosen. In this situation, you would have to make sure that everyone is aware that their own chances of living are increased due to the fact that organ donation will no longer depend on the few people who become organ donors. Those who object to being chosen in the survival lottery would be labeled
Utilitarianism is a consequentialist moral theory, meaning the morality of our actions is judged according to the consequences they bring about. According to utilitarianisms, all our actions should promote happiness. For Mill, happiness is intended pleasure and the absence of pain. In this paper, I will discuss the objection to Utilitarianism that is only fit for a swine, and Mill’s responses to that objection. Those people who reject this moral theory will say utilitarianism does not grant human life enough value compared to that of a pig. Mill gives an effective response and states that humans can and are the only ones that experiences higher pleasures and qualities of life, which make a human's life better than a pig's life.
When Bentham writes that, “By utility is meant that property in any object, whereby it tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness, (all this in or to prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil, or unhappi- ness to the party whose interest is considered.” He is basically saying do whatever means necessary to make the most out of it and if it applies to the individual, it only needs to benefit the individual but if it is referring to the community, the community must benefit as a whole. One should feel pleasure, but avoid pain since it represents the evil in one’s life. The ultimate goal of one’s life is to reach the climax of happiness, because that marks the end of the path. The author appeals to all three devices: ethos, logos and pathos because they are all incorporated into his writings.
In philosophy, utilitarianism argues that a pleasure state of being is preferred over a painful state of being. Utilitarianism also notes that all human utility must be taken into account when making moral judgments. Using this moral theory allows us to think that all moral rules and actions should be determined by their worth and future outcome. Though the idea of “the greatest good for the greatest number” may seem moral and correct, the flaw in utilitarianism is that it allows us to use immoral judgments and actions to reach the desired outcome. This becomes a problem for “moral” decision making because we can use immoral actions to get a future outcome that is not necessarily promised.
Both Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, had thoughts of the Principle of Utility and what it should be like. Bentham believes that the Principle of Utility depends on pain and pleasure and Mill believes that the Principle of Utility depends on higher pleasures and lower pleasures. Pain meaning evil and pleasure meaning good or greater benefits and higher pleasures meaning that action was good which would lead to a higher level of happiness and lower pleasures meaning bad which would lead to a decreasing level of happiness. Therefore, a normative ethical theory that has come through from this and it is Utilitarianism. The definition of Utilitarianism is a course of action that maximizes the total
Jeremy Bentham is widely regarded as the father of utilitarianism. He was born in 1748 into a family of lawyers and was himself, training to join the profession. During this process however, he became disillusioned by the state British law was in and set out to reform the system into a perfect one based on the ‘Greatest Happiness Principle,’ ‘the idea that pleasurable consequences are what qualify an action as being morally good’. Bentham observed that we are all governed by pain and pleasure; we all naturally aim to seek pleasure and avoid pain. He then decided that the best moral principle for governing our lives is one which uses this, the ‘Greatest Happiness Principle.’ This is that the amount of overall happiness or unhappiness that is caused by an action should determine whether an action is right or wrong. He stated,
Bentham’s Utilitarianism sees the highest good as the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Jeremy Bentham believed that by adding up the amounts of pleasure and pain for each possible act we should be able to choose the good thing to do. Happiness equaled pleasure minus pain. Bentham provided a way of measuring pleasure and pain, he called it the hedonic calculus. There are seven criteria to this calculus. First being the intensity being measured – how strong is the pleasure. The second criteria, duration – how long will the pleasure last. The third, certainty – how likely or unlikely is the pleasure. Fourth, Propinquity - How far off in the future is the pleasure or pain. The fifth, fecundity – what is the likely hood that a succession of pleasure will follow. The sixth criteria, purity – What is the probability that the pain will lead to other pain. Lastly, is the extent – how many people will be affected. This calculus gave Bentham a method of testing whether an action is morally right in that if it was good it would result in the most pleasurable outcome, having weighed up all the elements. These factors weigh up the potential amount of pleasure or pain which might arise from moral actions to decide which would be the best option to take. Ideally this formula should determine which act has the best tendency and is therefore
The ethical theory of utilitarianism is associated with the philosopher Jeremy Bentham. Utilitarianism essentially is the theory that good is what causes a person pleasure and evil is what causes a person pain. Bentham’s utilitarianism is sometimes titled Act Utilitarianism because it focuses on individual actions A “right” action, according to Betham, is one that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Where a “wrong” action is one that would cause more pain than pleasure. Before a person commits an action, they should look at the consequences that it can have on the individual and others. Hedonic Calculus is a method in determining how much pleasure or pain an action will elicit. Hedonic Calculus consists of seven criteria including intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity and extent. Each criteria can be given a score between -10 (worst pain) to +10 (highest pleasure). The action becomes ethical and moral if there is an overall net happiness for everyone that is affected. An acti...
And what makes Bentham a quantitative hedonist is that he believes each experience has a certain amount of pleasure allotted to it and those amounts can be compared across the board. Bentham does not feel any pleasures are greater than another. Just as he feels the pleasures of one person are greater than the next. Everyone and every pleasure are equal in the eyes of Bentham. Bentham bases his decisions off of the Principle of Utility, which is the foundation that you should act in the way that produces the most amount of pleasure for the most amount of people. When faced with the decision of choosing the life of the oyster versus the life of Haydn it is simple for Bentham. Because all pleasures are the same between the oyster and the human, Bentham would choose the life of the oyster. Bentham distinguishes the quantitative values of pleasures based on seven circumstances: intensity, duration, certainty or uncertainty, propinquity or remoteness, fecundity, purity, and extent. Although the intensity of the
When talking about pleasure there needs to be a distinction between the quality and the quantity. While having many different kinds of pleasures can be considered a good thing, one is more likely to favor quality over quantity. With this distinction in mind, one is more able to quantify their pleasures as higher or lesser pleasures by ascertaining the quality of them. This facilitates the ability to achieve the fundamental moral value that is happiness. In his book Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill offers a defining of utility as pleasure or the absence of pain in addition to the Utility Principle, where “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Mill 7). Through this principle, Mill emphasizes that it is not enough to show that happiness is an end in itself. Mill’s hedonistic view is one in support of the claim that every human action is motivated by or ought to be motivated by the pursuit of pleasure.
A moral theory should be one’s guide when deciding whether an action is either good or bad, wrong or right. There are many types of moral theories to choose from, but we will only focus on two: utilitarianism and ancient hedonism. These theories meet in their pursuit of something greater, for hedonism it’s personal pleasure while for utilitarianism it is happiness for the greater number of people. In this work, the differences and the similarities of utilitarianism and hedonism will be pointed out after explaining them separately.