Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How to argue the lottery
Moral values of the lottery
Argumentative essay on the lottery
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: How to argue the lottery
How is the lottery an example of the utilitarian monster? Utilitarianism concerns itself with promoting the best outcomes for the greatest numbers in order to be ethically acceptable, utilitarianism is a consequentialist approach which aims at results of actions regardless of how they are carried out. Utilitarian monsters, a term coined by R. Nozick, are those who “get enormously greater gains in utility from any sacrifice of others than these others lose. For, unacceptably, the theory seems to require that we all be sacrificed in the monster’s maw, in order to increase total utility”.(The Utility Monster, 2011) The lottery is an example of the utilitarian monster because it raises money instead of raising taxes by encouraging gambling and …show more content…
Could the case be made that, from a hedonistic utilitarian standpoint, the lottery is ethically recommendable because it serves the welfare not only of the winner but also of the millions of losers? Winning the lottery is a dream most people have; it is magical thinking, believing that you, the ticket buyer will be the one defying all the odds. The only ones, from the hedonistic utilitarian standpoint whosehappiness will increase are those who actually win the lottery, a very small number from among all the players. The hedonistic utilitarian standpoint is not ethically recommendable because the lottery is only selling the dream of winning it while filling the state coffers with people’s hard earned money. (Brusseau, J. 2012) The probabilities of winning the lottery on a single ticket isone in 175 million, a very small chance and most of us do not realize that those odds are immensity low. (Wasserstein, R.L. 2013) One of Lindsay Beyerstein’s concerns is that the lottery tends to redistribute money from the poortoward the rich. Does a utilitarian necessarily consider this redistribution
In her first publication, “Against the Odds, and Against the Common Good”, Gloria Jiménez tries to convince the readers that the lottery business is urging people to gamble. The thesis is apparent in the first paragraph: “Still, when all is said and done about lotteries bringing a bit of excitement into the lives of many people and bringing a vast amount of money into the lives of a few, the states should not be in the business of urging people to gamble” (118). The author successfully presents valid arguments to support her opposition to state-run lotteries throughout the essay; whether the evidence will properly convince most readers the way she wants them to, is questionable. Although the valid arguments and evidence Jiménez provides is adequate for the essay, I believe only one argument really stands out to convince her readers the purpose of the essay.
Has the lottery helped education as promised? There has been evidence in the Bible and ancient Rome texts that lotteries can be traced all the way back to Europe in the 15th century (Willmann 1). After that the lotteries made their way across the Atlantic from England to the United States.The first American lottery was established in Puerto Rico in 1934. This was followed by the New Hampshire lottery in 1964.The entire history of the lottery includes the debate over whether or not it is ethical.Lotteries are not only unethical but also ineffective ways to raise state revenues for education.
The following two paragraphs are a summary of Gloria Jimenez's essay Against the Odds and Against the Common Good. States should neither allow nor encourage state-run lotteries. There are five major arguments that people use to defend lotteries. One is that most lotteries are run honestly, but if gambling is harmful to society it is irrelevant to argue if they are honest or not. The second is that lotteries create jobs, but there are only a small handful of jobs that would be eliminated if lotteries were put out of business. Another argument that would support keeping lotteries is that, other than gambling addicts, people freely choose to buy lottery tickets. This is true, however, there are misleading advertisements that may cause people to buy tickets under false pretenses.
Prior to reading about this study I had always thought that richer people played the lottery much more than those with less money. I always just assumed that because the rich had a lot of money that they just played for the heck of it and could afford to spend hundreds of dollars on purchasing tickets. But after the conclusion of their experiment proved otherwise I was pretty shocked., and after reading why it was that poorer people actually spent more on tickets it made so much more sense and I was able to see exactly why that was.
Michelson, D. The historical reception of Shirley Jackson's "the lottery". In: KURZBAN, Robert; PLATEK, Steve. 18th annual meeting of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society at the University of Pennsylvania and Drexel University. 2006.
The Lottery gains through selling tickets a massive amount of utility (money/pleasure). Much more than one person who buys a lottery
We see a very disturbing ending in the Shirley Jackson’s, The Lottery where the reader believes that the lottery in mention is solely a monetary game of chance, like in our lives presently. However,
How can you set yourself up to argue in favour of or against the ethical existence of the lottery in terms of monetized utilitarianism?
The theme in “The Lottery” is violence and cruelty. Violence and cruelty is a major theme because there is a lot of violence and cruelty in the world. The Lottery has been read as addressing such issues as the public's fascination with salacious and scandalizing journalism, McCarthyism, and the complicity of the general public in the victimization of minority groups, epitomized by the Holocaust of World War II. The Holocaust was very cruel and violent cause other people didn’t like certain people so they just kill them and their children and still now we have violence and cruelty with wars and people that hate each other.
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
In this paper, I will define and explain Utilitarianism, then evaluate the proofs made to support it. In the nineteenth century, the philosophy of Utilitarianism was developed by John Stuart Mill. Utilitarianism is the theory that man should judge everything in life based upon its ability to promote the greatest individual happiness. While Jeremy Bentham is acknowledged as the father of Utilitarianism, it was Mill who defended its structure through reason. He continually reasoned that because human beings are capable of achieving conscious thought, they are not simply satisfied by physical pleasures; humans desire to pleasure their minds as well. Once a person has achieved this high intellectual level, they do not want to descend to the lower level of intellect where they began. Mill explains that “pleasure, and
Ethical issues and probability on advertising the lottery Nilesh Dhake King Graduate School at Monroe College Prof. Devindranauth Rawana July 2, 2015 Ethics: In simple words Ethics is “moral principles that govern a person's or group's behavior.” Ethics is two things. To start with, Ethics alludes to very much established benchmarks of good and bad that recommend what people should do, more often than not as far as rights, commitments, advantages to society, decency, or particular temperance. Ethics, for instance, alludes to those principles that force the sensible commitments to forgo assault, taking, homicide, ambush, criticism, and misrepresentation.
From the time the Europeans first landed on the Atlantic shore, lotteries have been a part of the American society. According to Will Spink, most states are currently operating a state lottery despite its bleak history in the U.S. (Spink 1). Since 1983, North Carolina has introduced lottery bills in the legislature every year (NC Christian 15). North Carolina Governor, Mike Easley, favors a lottery for increasing revenues for education (Analysis 2). However lucrative state lotteries appear on the surface, they create even more moral and financial difficulties for citizens, and this should encourage states to look at other means of resources instead of legalized gambling.
And to this day many feel that lottery revenues help the community, primarily education. If anyone has ever watched a lottery commercial we are often persuaded to believe they are supporting a "good cause" which is the primary messages they use to advertize themselves, both to lottery players and to the voting public.