Examples Of Utilitarianism In The Lottery

“A pretty summer day, every member of a rural village attends a yearly drawing in which everyone's name is entered. Because of its belief in an ancient superstition in which human sacrifice ensures good crops, the community stones the "winner" of the lottery, Tess Hutchinson.” “The Lottery” by Shirley Johnson is a short story used to induce the ineffectiveness of following traditions blindly and demonstrates a subjective loss of a human being in order to ensure the survival of others. Having thought of “The Lottery” one can relate it to an ethical theory called “Utilitarianism Theory”. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist ethical theory determined on maximizing the inclusive good. This theory confronts our well being by choosing the action that maximizes utility and the one that brings happiness to the majority of people while exploiting minorities. Utilitarianism is a normative theory that judges the action by how much of pleasure or pain it brings. However, some individuals would refuse to abide by the utilitarianism’s principles by criticizing the theory on several levels ranging from violating ones right, impartial decision makers, immeasurability, ignore justice, tyranny of the majority.

First, utilitarianism violates that the right of a person can be achieved on behalf of the other.

An example would be a wealthy person who’s in need for a transplant. If he/she offers to donate for a charity a good sum of money, he/she would be placed first on the list to get an organ transplant. But this cause the right for the next person to receive an equal right to have the transplant but because the wealthy person brings more good, has more right. Another critique would be regarding the impartial decision maker that does not allow special relationships and kinships to effect their decision. Demonstrating a train dilemma in which you have your family on a train and you have several people of discrete connection on another train.

You
3
are obliged to sacrifice either your family or the majority of people. Who would you choose? Utilitarianism emphasizes on risking your family to weigh the overall good.
Utilitarianism cannot be quantified. Whenever we need to measure our pleasure we set it as being countable when in fact its not. Pleasure is immeasurable and it is sometimes impossible to compare the pleasure of getting a new job to that of washing your dirty car. Eventually, one of the main critiques of utilitarianism is justice and tyranny of the majority. Justice may be referred to as treating everyone fairly; however utilitarianism states that it is acceptable to kill a person for the benefit of a greater good. Eventually, tyranny of the majority enlightens us on confusing with the popularity with what are right. If the majority is against homosexuality then some laws will be implemented to serve this purpose. Not because the majority of people prefer something makes it right or justifies its implications.
By accusing utilitarianism as being able to expose majority and exploit minority, the theory that disrupts ones right, biased decision makers, incalculable, disregards justice and terminates the minority. Just because of this unsupported theories. Is it about killing a single human to save majority? What if this single human is of greater benefit to the society or a certain field? Who is worth killing that single beneficial human or the highly numbered majority? We are uncountable as individuals; we are human beings with a heart soul and mind. We have reason and we acknowledge knowledge away from exposing majorities but through enhancing minorities and giving equal chances and rights to each individual willing to accept it.