Original Position: Utilitarianism Principle Of Justice

965 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Discussing utilitarianism

I will argue that according to Rawls, agents in the Original Position behind a veil of ignorance would not endorse a utilitarianism principle of justice because they, as rational individuals, would seek to create a cooperative scheme that would be the most beneficial to themselves, and advocating for a utilitarian principle of justice under such blind conditions would be far too great a risk for them to take.
Utilitarianism is a moral theory asserting that the morally right action is the one that produces the most favorable balance of good over evil, everyone considered (69). It is wholly concerned with the amount of net utility that an action generates. Utilitarianism has been one of the most influential moral theories throughout history. …show more content…

(646)” Therefore, Rawls concludes that agents in the Original Position would emphatically not accept a utilitarian principle of justice. Rawls assumes that it would never be to any man’s benefit to adopt utilitarian principles from the Original Position. However, I assert that once the Veil of Ignorance is stripped away, some men may find that it would have been to their benefit to adopt utilitarian principles; the only problem is that those same men may find that it was to their extreme detriment to advocate for the same. The way utilitarian principles will affect an individual can only be determined after the veil of ignorance is stripped away and people become aware of their morally irrelevant social contingencies. This means that agents in the Original Position may stand to gain by adopting utilitarian principles, but they may also stand to lose exponentially. Therefore, it is not simply that rational men would not advocate for utilitarian principles, but that they would be taking a grave risk by doing so. Utilitarianism condones murdering one to save many, and no rational man would gamble his life, knowing there is a chance that he will be the one sacrificed, simply because it will result in the most happiness in the

Show More
Related

  • Use of Human Fetal Tissue in Research is Morally Repugnant

    2072 Words  | 5 Pages

    The bottom line is that utilitarianism has a derisory view in human character and motives. Man is not good and will never be good which is reflected on the current world scene today. Man will do anything that has a good result yet the process is immoral. Sproul sums this ethic up by stating, “In balancing positive and negative utilities and excluding from the equation the objective sacredness of all human life, utilitarianism arrives at morally repugnant actions” (41).

    Read More

  • On Utilitarianism

    1122 Words  | 3 Pages

    ... believe that if the intent of the agent's actions is to try to maximize the greater good or to create the greatest net utility possible, then it does not matter whether or not one is successful in carrying out his/her chosen act. Lastly, questions of morality and whether what one is doing in upholding the utilitarian concepts is "right" hold no ground. This is because utilitarianism clearly states that if the act in question maximizes the net utility, without causing harm or pain to all considered, the real moral question becomes, "Wouldn't you be morally wrong in not carrying out said act?"

    Read More

  • Rawls Principles Of Justice Essay

    1396 Words  | 3 Pages

    According to Rawls, the challenge of justice is to ensure a just distribution of primary goods that include powers and opportunities, rights and liberties, means of self-respect, income and wealth among others (Rawls, 2001). Rawls disputes the earlier predominant common source of injustice, the utilitarianism theory, which states that justice is best defined by that which provides the greatest good for the greatest number of people. The theory of utilitarianism ignores the moral worth of an individual. This theory does not take into consideration the minority. An example is the mistreatment of the Jews by the Nazi Germans (Rawls, 2001).

    Read More

  • Rawls Theory Of Justice

    3346 Words  | 7 Pages

    Why is it that a person has to offset his initial gain for the betterment of others? Rawls proposes this idea as the criterion for his second principle, the difference principle. What I argue however, is that the difference principle proposes to remove inequality from society but fails in this endeavor due to retaining enough inequality to benefit the disadvantaged, leaving the principle defective in its nature. This will be the question analyzed in this essay where I will first explain the two principles proposed by Rawls as well as the lexical order or priority, which is a central feature within A Theory of Justice. I...

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism Argument Analysis

    1321 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this paper I will argue that Utilitarianism is a weak argument. According to John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism is defined as the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Happiness is pleasure and absence of pain (Mill, 114). At first glance the Utility perspective seems logical, however it often conflicts with justice and morality. I will begin by presenting the idea that good consequences do not always determine the right thing to do. Then I will provide the counterargument that utilitarians can bite the bullet. Next I will explain that Utilitarianism is too demanding for anyone to live by, and finally provide the counterarguments from the Utilitarianism perspective.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism In John Stuart Mill

    1161 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • John Rawls: “Original Position”

    1126 Words  | 3 Pages

    Rawls creates a hypothetical society, via a thought experiment known as the “Veil of Ignorance,” in which all that you knew of yourself is eliminated from your mind to allow you to come to a rational decision on how you would like your society to be organized. Rawls principle is that under a social contract what is right must be the same for everyone. The essence of Rawls' “veil of ignorance” is that it is designed to be a representation of persons purely in their capacity as free and equal moral persons. Out of this experiment Rawls provides us with two basic p...

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism

    1254 Words  | 3 Pages

    Act-utilitarianism is a theory suggesting that actions are right if their utility or product is at least as great as anything else that could be done in the situation or circumstance. Despite Mill's conviction that act-utilitarianism is an acceptable and satisfying moral theory there are recognized problems. The main objection to act-utilitarianism is that it seems to be too permissive, capable of justifying any crime, and even making it morally obligatory to do so. This theory gives rise to the i...

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism

    2011 Words  | 5 Pages

    The most important question of all is what should one do since the ultimate purpose of answering questions is either to satisfy curiosity or to decide which action to take. Complicated analysis is often required to answer that question. Beyond ordinary analysis, one must also have a system of values, and the correct system of values is utilitarianism.

    Read More

  • John Rawls And Utilitarianism

    2028 Words  | 5 Pages

    The social contract theory of John Rawls challenges utilitarianism by pointing out the impracticality of the theory. Mainly, in a society of utilitarians, a citizens rights could be completely ignored if injustice to this one citizen would benefit the rest of society. Rawls believes that a social contract theory, similar those proposed by Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau, would be a more logical solution to the question of fairness in any government. Social contract theory in general and including the views of Rawls, is such that in a situation where a society is established of people who are self interested, rational, and equal, the rules of justice are established by what is mutually acceptable and agreed upon by all the people therein. This scenario of negotiating the laws of that society that will be commonly agreed upon and beneficial to all is what Rawls terms "The Original Position and Justification".

    Read More

  • Qualitative Hedonism and Happiness

    1199 Words  | 3 Pages

    The. “What Utilitarianism Is”: Chapter 2.

    Read More

  • Jeremy Bentham : Father of Utilitarianism

    1451 Words  | 3 Pages

    Utilitarianism is a reality, not just a theory like many other philosophies; it is practiced every day, for instance the vote system. This ongoing practice of utilitarianism in society has show that it is flawed. Just because the masses vote for something, doesn’t make it right. The masses can be fooled, as in Nazi Germany for example, thousands of people were behind Hitler even though his actions were undeniably evil. Utilitarianism is a logical system, but it requires some sort of basic, firm rules to prevent such gross injustices, violations of human rights, and just obviously wrong thing ever being allowed. This could be the ‘harm principle’ which Mill devised.

    Read More

  • System Theory Case Study

    788 Words  | 2 Pages

    ... utilitarianism could be done in a wrong way. For example, an act of stealing from the rich to give the benefits to the poor, will still be considered a good action. Even though the process could be considered as a crime, the purpose or result however, is to promote the happiness of the poor people; for what matters to utilitarianism is the results only, not the motives nor the methods – hence the questions arise about utilitarianism being unjust. However, according to Mill arguments regarding the protests, justice actually preserves peace among people, and that is the implementation of the definition of utilitarianism itself.

    Read More

  • John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice

    959 Words  | 2 Pages

    middle of paper ... ... The individual in the original position is unlikely to gamble their human rights for the greater good, particularly if they are mutually disinterested, so it is unreasonable in practicality to assume such altruism on their behalf. To conclude, Rawls’ strengths lie in his focus on the individual, protection of liberty, and equal opportunity, which supports a healthy society. The criticisms of his theory include a question as to what is best for society as a whole, dismissal of beneficial inequalities and the potential for society to develop its own code of ethics as it has in reality.

    Read More

  • Jeremy Bentham's Utilitarianism

    1702 Words  | 4 Pages

    Utilitarianism is a movement in ethics which began in the late eighteenth centaury and is primarily associated with the English philosopher Jeremy Bentham and was later adapted and fully developed by John Stuart Mill in the ninetieth century. . The theory states that we should try to achieve ‘the greatest good for the greatest number’. Utilitarianism is a teleological theory of ethics. Teleological theories of ethics look at the consequences to decide whether an action is right or wrong. Utilitarianism is defined as a doctrine that the useful is the good and that the determining consideration of right conduct should be the usefulness of it consequences: specifically: a theory that the aim of action should be the largest possible

    Read More

More about Original Position: Utilitarianism Principle Of Justice

Open Document