Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The case of utilitarianism
Difference between deontology and utilitarianism
Deontology vs utilitarianism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The case of utilitarianism
Utilitarianism vs. Deontology Introduction: Throughout this essay I will compare the ethical theory of utilitarianism with that of deontology. I will provide an argument that deontology is a more appropriate ethical theory than utilitarianism. Body: A discussion of the main elements of Utilitarianism: Utilitarianism judges actions on the basis of how much utility or benefit is derived, for the welfare of the majority, through undertaking these actions. It suggests that no act is necessarily right or wrong but the degree of correctness in the act depends on the utility gained by the majority. One of the defects of utilitarianism is that it justifies immoral acts as being deemed necessary if it prohibits future detriment for the majority. An
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that seeks to define right and wrong actions based solely on the consequences they produce. By utilitarian standards, an act is determined to be right if and only if it produces the greatest total amount of happiness for everyone. Happiness (or utility) is defined as the amount of pleasure less the amount of pain (Mill, 172). In order to act in accordance with utilitarianism, the agent must not only impartially attend to the pleasure of everyone, but they must also do so universally, meaning that everyone in the world is factored into the morality of the action.
Pojman, L. (2002). 6: Utilitarianism. Ethics: discovering right and wrong (pp. 104-113). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
The utilitarian faces many problems because he loses any ability to live a personal life. By this is meant that in making decisions the utilitarian must consider the steps which lead to the highest level of goodness in society. The utilitarian reaches for the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Two main aspects dominate the light of utilitarian beliefs. The consequentialist principle explains that in determining the rightness or wrongness of an act one must examine the results that will follow. The utility principle is that you can only deem something to be good if it in itself will bring upon a specific desired state, such as happiness or fulfillment. There are two types of utilitarians: Act utilitarians and Rule utilitarians. An act utilitarian believes that a person must think things through before making a decision. The only exception to this idea applies with rules of thumb; decisions that need to be made spontaneously. The right act is the one that results in the most utility. Rule utilitarians believe that an act is only deemed appropriate if it fits in line with the outline of valid rules within a system of rules that target the most favorable outcome.
Also, since deontologists place a high value on the individual, in some instances it is permissible not to maximize the good when it is detrimental to yourself. For example, one does not need to impoverish oneself to the point of worthlessness simply to satisfy one’s moral obligations. Deontology can be looked at as a generally flexible moral theory that allows for self-interpretation but like all others theories studied thus far, there are arguments one can make against its reasoning. One objection to deontological moral theory is that the theory yields only absolutes and cannot always justify its standpoints.
Utilitarianism states that the right actions are the ones that create the most happiness for the greatest number of people (Mill, 1871 Pg. 1072). Utilitarianism posits that actions are right because, and to the extent that; they result in good (Mill, 1871 Pg. 1072). Therefore, the right action for a utilitarian is the one that does the most good, where the most good is happiness. A utilitarian holds happiness as the highest intrinsic value, and happiness is intended to mean pleasure (Mill, 1871 Pg. 1072). An action is wrong because it promotes pain, the opposite of happiness or pl...
Utilitarianism is the view that "what is good is determined by the consequences of the action". If it can be shown that an action benefits the greater amount, then it is good because it outweighs the small amount of harm that the action has caused (Pollock, 2004).... ... middle of paper ... ...
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, seeks to promote happiness as an end in itself. Reasonable and moderate versions of both theories really warrant the same action in most cases; for example, giving to charity and avoiding unfairly produced goods. The differences in suggested action only emerge in a few unique situations; the real distinction is in the underlying beliefs supporting the two theories. Deontology promotes a fair opportunity at happiness and self-advocacy, whereas Utilitarianism’s objective is the promotion of happiness. While happiness is indeed a great thing, I worry that by only looking at the result of an action Utilitarian actions could far too easily infringe upon one’s right to self-determination. I prefer Deontology for this reason and for its objective of respecting human autonomy and mandate to treat humanity always as an end and not as a simple means.
There are numerous views and opinions regarding the field of philosophy, in particularly the different ethical theories. I am going to explain the main idea as well as discuss the differences between the utilitarianism, the deontological, and the virtue-ethical theories of morality by presenting what I find to be the strengths and weaknesses of each theory.
A natural way to see whether an act is the right thing to do (or the wrong thing to do) is to look at its results, or consequences. Utilitarianism argues that, given a set of choices, the act we should choose is that which produces the best results for the greatest number affected by that choice.
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.”
The claim that “utilitarianism entails manifold injustice, disintegrated lives, and decisions that are not decisions at all” is a fair assessment. These three objections to utilitarianism are difficult to overcome. One of the issues with utilitarianism as a theory is that it creates manifold injustice. In terms of justice toward others, the theory requires the sacrifice of the minority interests, and perhaps their rights as well, to those of the majority. This usage of
Deontology, on the other hand, emphasizes on the moral intuitions that guide one’s conscience for or against certain actions (Curcă, 2013). Deontologists are the opposites of utilitarians because the essential judgment of taking or not taking a course of action is observed in its strictest sense. Apart from feelings and conditions, deontologists also consider the consequences of not following religious rules and natural laws of morality to guide every course of action. Thus, deontologists value three major principles of decision-making: intrinsic morality, the duty of care, and the moral consequences of an action.
The utilitarianism is a conceptual framework which claims that the end and consequences justify the means. On the contrary, deontology is a theory which strongly ignores the end as a tool of justifying the means. Deontology is an ethical system which utilizes the moral code to deliver judgment on the right or wrong behind a specific action while neglecting the consequences. According to Immanuel Kant, the theory means following the proper behavioral rules with a close focus on equality and fairness promotion. Consider the case where the government identifies your land as a potential and tremendous location of a city park.
Utilitarianism is defined to be “the view that right actions are those that result in the most beneficial balance of good over bad consequences for everyone involved” (Vaughn 64). In other words, for a utilitarian,