Consequentialism Research Paper

639 Words2 Pages

Define consequentialism, and explain why act utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism. How does consequentialism differ from rival approaches to ethics? Do you find consequentialism to be a plausible way of thinking about right and wrong? Explain your answer.

Consequentialism is the view that, according to FoE, the morality of actions, policies, motives, or rules depends on their producing the best actual or expected results. In other words, do as much good as you can. Act utilitarianism, a sub-group of consequentialism, claims that well-being is the only thing that is intrinsically valuable, and that an action is morally required just because it does more to improve overall well-being than any other action you could have done in the circumstances. Basically, Act utilitarianism agrees completely with consequentialism, but ensure that those actual or expected results end up improving well-being. Consequentialism, as a whole, while extremely similar to other moral theories, such as hedonism and the desire theory, are, in fact, slightly different. Hedonism claims that a life is good to the extent that it is filled with pleasure and free from pain, and consequentialists, while not disagreeing with hedonism, would say that the pleasure and freedom from pain depends entirely on the actual or expected results. The desire theory claims that something is good for you if, and only if, it satisfies your desires and because it satisfies your desires, while consequentialists would say that those desires should improve overall well-being, and not to be selfish about it.
I think consequentialism is plausible, but I cannot really be too sure about whether it is the truth or not. After all, it is simply a moral theory. However, I reali...

... middle of paper ...

...st results (FoE p151.)
Personally, I think that neither theory is entirely right or entirely wrong. The flaw I see in act utilitarianism is that if you are always doing everything you can in every situation imaginable to improve well-being of everyone, then you aren’t really living life, you’re simply doing a job every moment of your life. Even sleeping could somehow not benefit the well-being of everyone, if the better option is to stay awake and perform more well-being improving tasks. The flaw I see in rule consequentialism is that, in the world of radical Muslims, it is okay to commit suicide and murder, because that’s the accepted norm of their small society, even though it is due to their religious beliefs. That, to me, does not make it right. However, I would say as a general rule, rule consequentialism seems to satisfy my mind more than act utilitarianism.

Open Document