There is a firefighter who is obligated to make a crucial decision. Upon arrival to a five-alarm blaze, the firefighter must make a life or death decision. There are two individuals unconscious in the burning building, and only one can be saved. One person is Dr. Rutland, a world-renowned pioneer in treating suicidal-depressives. The medication he has developed has helped thousands of patients already, and when perfected, will save many more. The other individual is Dr. Rutland’s secretary. Being that only one person is to survive, who should be saved?
In order to decide what the moral or ethical decision would be in this situation, one may look the utilitarian philosophy of Mill. According to Mill,
The theory of morality- that pleasure, and the freedom from pain, are the only things desirable as ends; and that all desirable things are desirable either for the pleasure inherent in themselves, or as means to the promotion of pleasure and the prevention of pain. (Mill 1)
Because Mill believes that in order to achieve morality, whatever will result in the greatest amount of pleasure and the least amount of pain will be the correct choice, he is a consequentialist. With all of this in mind, Mill derives a theory known as the Greatest Happiness Principle. The GHP requires that in order for a decision to be morally right, it has to promote the greatest good for the greatest number. Mill states, “The ultimate end [of the GHP], is an existence exempt as far possible from pain, and as rich as possible in enjoyments, both in point of quantity and quality (Mill 2),” the quantity being the greatest number, quality being the greatest good. Mill also says that “The utilitarian standard … is not the agent’s own greatest happiness, but the greatest amount of happiness altogether. (Mill 2)”
According to Mill’s theory of utilitarianism, Dr. Rutland should be the one who is saved. Mill’s theory of the greatest good for the greatest number states that in any situation when one is trying to make a decision, the right choice will always be the one that benefits most people as a result of that decision. Dr. Rutland is a famous physician who treats suicidal persons. With his development of this medication, many lives have already been saved. With the continuation of research, the medication could be perfected, and many more lives could be saved in...
... middle of paper ...
...he option of saving either one person’s life who may save lives if he survives, or saving the two lives, a mother and an unborn child, Kant believes that saving two lives is going to be morally correct because it is saving more than one life now, not the possibility of saving someone else’s life later.
If the secretary was the firefighter’s mother, there are two possibilities of whether or not the firefighter should save her, based on Kant’s philosophy. Using Kant’s second test to determine whether or not saving the mother would be morally right, the firefighter would have to determine if the reasons behind saving his or her mother were because of a means to an end. For example, if the reason the firefighter wanted to say his or her mother is for his own sake, or for some other “need,” such as food, clothing, shelter, etc. If the firefighter were to determine that the reasons his or her mother should be saved were, indeed, for some means to an end, saving the secretary would have no moral worth. If, however, the firefighter determines that the secretary/mother is treated with the dignity and respect she deserves, then it is morally right to save her.
In the previous mentioned dilemma, in order to save lives, murder must be committed. What ever that person decides to do will contradict the person’s desire to do a good deed. Despite his actions being pure his will to do good was not met, which is not a good thing. In the term of the law of universals, you must do act according to maxims that could become universal laws. You cannot commit murder, because you wouldn’t want murder to become a universal law. It would be immoral for everyone to go around murdering others; life would be worthless and invaluable. You also cannot save the live of those in need of saving. If everyone disregarded the need for saving others, such as fireman, police, paramedics, then life would also lose its value, because someone’s life is no longer worthy enough to be saved. Good will cannot be unconditionally good if it violates Kant’s own law of
Mill made a distinction between happiness and sheer sensual pleasure. He defines happiness in terms of higher order pleasure (i.e. social enjoyments, intellectual). In his Utilitarianism (1861), Mill described this principle as follows:According to the Greatest Happiness Principle … The ultimate end, end, with reference to and for the sake of which all other things are desirable (whether we are considering our own good or that of other people), is an existence exempt as far as possible from pain, and as rich as possible enjoyments.Therefore, based on this statement, three ideas may be identified: (1) The goodness of an act may be determined by the consequences of that act. (2) Consequences are determined by the amount of happiness or unhappiness caused. (3) A "good" man is one who considers the other man's pleasure (or pain) as equally as his own.
In 2015 only 59 shark attacks have occurred around the world compared to the millions of sharks killed by humans every year. Due to these accidental shark attacks people tend to think that sharks, especially Great Whites are evil creatures with malice intentions when attacks do occur; but, on the contrary that is wrong. Sharks are not the only beautiful and unique creatures in the ocean, they also play a vital role in our ecosystem; however, due to human interference they might not be around much longer, through awareness sharks can be protected from endangerment.
John Stuart Mill argues that the rightness or wrongness of an action, or type of action, is a function of the goodness or badness of its consequences, where good consequences are ones that maximize the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. In this essay I will evaluate the essential features of Mill’s ethical theory, how that utilitarianism gives wrong answers to moral questions and partiality are damaging to Utilitarianism.
Thesis: Sharks should be conserved because they are an important part of the ocean, attacks are often incidental, and human behavior influences the behavior of sharks.
Watching a movie where hundreds of swimmers on a beach are in a complete panic because of shark attacks makes a person scared to swim in an ocean, lake, or even a pond. Not only movies, but also documentaries of shark attacks stress how dangerous sharks are. In reality, are sharks really that dangerous or is it how they are portrayed? Stephen R. Palumbi who is a Professor of Biology at Stanford University and also the Director at the Hopkins Marine Station at Stanford wrote an article about other animals living in the ocean that are more dangerous to humans than sharks. In fact, he has written books about creatures in the water such as The Death and Life of Monterey Bay, and The Evolution Explosion. In addition, his son Anthony R. Palumbi is a novelist and a science writer that has written for Atlantic and other publications (Princeton University Press 1). Together they co- authored an article titled “Forget Shark Week: They aren’t the only fish in the sea” that was published the Los Angeles Times.
They are creatures that have no clue what we are and are afraid of us. Every year, thousands of more people are killed by other people than by sharks; thousand more people are killed in car accidents than by sharks, and more people are killed by lightning strikes than by sharks. Each year humans kill tens of thousands of sharks, yet, there are fewer than 100 shark attacks upon humans. For example, The Great White shark also known as the man-eater, has the greatest reputation for attacking humans. Recent studies of Great Whites show that they mainly feed on sea-mammals. Seen from below the surface a person swimming with a shark looks much like a seal, with arms and legs sticking out. The shark usually surprises its victim, being a person or seal, by one massive bite, and then retreats in order to allow the victim to die before digesting the food. For this reason, many humans survived the attack of a Great White shark if they are saved before being eaten. Not only getting out of the water and be safe, but the result of loss, blood or
John Stuart Mill claims that people often misinterpret utility as the test for right and wrong. This definition of utility restricts the term and denounces its meaning to being opposed to pleasure. Mill defines utility as units of happiness caused by an action without the unhappiness caused by an action. He calls this the Greatest Happiness Principle or the Principle of Utility. Mill’s principle states that actions are right when they tend to promote happiness and are wrong when they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. Happiness is defined as intended pleasure and the absence of pain while unhappiness is defined as pain and the lack of pleasure. Therefore, Mill claims, pleasure and happiness are the only things desirable and good. Mill’s definition of utilitarianism claims that act...
Sharks have several ways to dispatch their prey with surprise attacks, agility, and camouflaged sneak attacks. The shark’s dentition also tells the story of their diet as well as their method of attack. The Great White Shark, (Carcharodon carcharias), is the largest extant predatory shark on Earth and has large serrated teeth that tear through the flesh of its prey. Their teeth are 2.5-3 inches in height and have prominent serrations which allow them to tear large chunks out of prey including large fish, seals, sea lions, other sharks, carrion, dolphins, elephant seals, stingrays, and fish [8], [13]. These sharks hunt by swimming below the intended prey item and with a sudden burst of speed; they will attack with a large single bite and then swim off to allow the prey to bleed to death. These sharks are famous for breaching the water to grab seals and sea lions around the coast of South Africa in an area called Seal Island [7]. When the seals swim farther off from the island where the water is much deeper, the shark’s rate of a successful attack increase compared to the lowered success rate in shallower waters where the seals can easily outmaneuver them [7]. The bite force of the Great White measures around 4,000 pounds and is able to bite prey in half [10]. Great Whites
... shells “wailing” their “shrill, demented” mourning. The last sounds these soldiers are forced to listen to are their killers’ ridiculing at their naïve decision to fight. Weapons in Owen’s poems are personified to mock the war and reinforce its futility.
Whether put simply or scrutinized, morality cannot be defined simply by looking at it from one or two perspectives. One must acknowledge the fact that there are several different factors that affect judgment between “right” and “wrong”. Only after taking into account everything that could possibly change the definition of righteousness can one begin to define morality. Harriet Baber, a professor at San Diego State University, defines morality as “the system through which we determine right and wrong conduct”. Baber refers to morality as a process or method when she calls it a “system”. In saying “we” she then means to say that this concept does not only apply to her but also to everyone else. Through morality, according to her, one can look at an action, idea, or situation and determine its righteousness and its consequences.
One of the major players in ethical theories has long been the concept of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism states that in general the ethical rightness or wrongness of an action is directly related to the utility of that action.”Such theories suppose that the only thing that has non derivatives value is the welfare or happiness of sentient being. “(pg. 450) There are two types of Utilitarianism; these are “act” and “rule”. An act utilitarian uses thought processes associated with utilitarianism (i.e. the principle of utility) to make all decisions, this requires a lot of thought and careful calculation. Contrary to an act utilitarian, a rule utilitarian uses the principles of utility to create a set of rules by which they live. Rule utilitarians are not incapable of calculating a decision; they just do not see a need to do it all the time. Utility is more specifically defined as a measure of the goodness or badness of the consequences of an action.” …Utility, or the Greatest happiness principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to produce the the reverse happiness. By happiness is intended, pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure.” (pg.461) For Mill it was not so much about the quantity but the quality of pleasure. “It would be absurd that while, in estimating all other things, quality is considered as well as quantity, the estimation of pleasure should be supposed to depend on quantity alone”(pg.462) Mill argues that happiness is the sole basis of morality, and that people never desire anything but happiness. He supports this claim by showing that all the other objects of people's desire are either means to happiness, or included in the definition of happine...
This principle promotes a life of more pleasure than pain by choosing actions that produce more happiness. These are conscious actions made that follow a life of utility and act in accordance with the “Greatest Happiness Principle.” Though Mill’s critics would argue that Utilitarianism is not a reasonable foundation for morality by not fulfilling a life of happiness, creating selfish or expedient people, and reducing human experience to animals, I would have to disagree. This principle promotes happiness and pleasure for all, along with aiding individuals to be less selfish, and an even slate for people of all characters. I find the “Greatest Happiness Principle” to be a relevant and altruistic foundation of morality. There is an emphasis on lives containing more pleasure than pain under the rule that one person cannot put their own happiness above others. I think a type of morality such as this would be more successful than other forms of morality because it wants every human life to be a life filled with more pleasure than pain. I see this as an appropriate foundation because it promotes good over bad, which is ultimately the function of morality as a whole. As written by Raymond Plant, “Since the principle of the individual is to try to satisfy his desires…the principle of society should be to try to advance the satisfactions of those who belong to the society…”
Qualitative and quantitative researcher’s exhibited conflicting ways of approaching a research. Some researchers prefer qualitative over quantitative and vice-versa. Also, it is common for qualitative and quantitative to be used together in a research. But, both methods when carried out correctly provide good research. Plus, both methods have their own unique differences and characteristics. In this paper I will define three of these characteristics in a quantitative and qualitative research design and discuss and compare their differences. (Smith & Davis, 2010)
Ethics is the philosophical study of morality. These days our society is changing due to advanced technology, hence the study of ethics is very important than the previous decades. In fact, the study of ethics is not a new issue but Socrates and Plato used ethical reasoning to explain different unjust issues before 2000 years. Ethics is one of the major issues, which does have not any guideline to a particular activity that is morally good, bad or neutral. However, everyone has different understanding and judgment about ethics depend on their cultural, economical, and family back ground. For instance, lying is unethical in most society and it is normal for some other cultures. Therefore, it is difficult to give universal meaning about morality as it depends on a given culture. For this reason, I would say there is not a single universal standard to label someone’s ethical decision as right and wrong. However, all countries should adopt ethical behavior with their environment in order to have honesty and caring society. An Individual can choose among different alternatives based on his or her ethical decision, but it is very difficult to say his or her ethical decision is right or wrong.