Philosopher and economist Jeremy Bentham decides to mix math with philosophy to what is now known as utilitarianism. Bentham’s goal is to provide happiness. This theory works to an extent, but then goes downhill. The reason Bentham’s theory is so complicated to understand is that it needs to get fixed by his student. His student John Stewart Mill tries to fix the difference between pain and pleasure. With the theory sort of fix people by Stewart Mill people still find it hard to understand how the theory actually works. Utilitarianism is the most inappropriate moral theory because it looks directly at the “cause and effect” relationship of our actions. In this essay I will argue that utilitarianism isn’t a good ethical theory and how it fails …show more content…
Even though I’m against utilitarianism; there are still some pros that say utilitarianism is a good thing. This theory is very direct Bentham wants everyone happy and when John Stewart Mill takes over the theory, he wants to fix the difference between pain and pleasure. Mill explains that the single principle of all this is to minimize all the pain and maximize everything that is pleasure and happiness. The system was created so that all individuals could have a happier life. As the theory was created to benefit the majority of the population and everything was to benefit the people, everything in the theory has common sense. It is easy to explain why utilitarianism is a very widely accepted theory since its creation. Therefore utilitarianism doesn’t affect anyone who follows another religion and makes the theory neutral. If we put the theory of utilitarianism into our political view, it would go more towards the Democratic side. For example, is most often used in our health care system: care is provided to improve the health of the population and if more money is spent on the health service, people are healthier and therefore happier. The theory can relate to everything we do in our everyday lives. For example, you give money to charity and it promotes happiness for poor people and is seen to be good. The theory can be used all around the …show more content…
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that says any action is morally right if the consequence is positive or for the better. The difficulty with utilitarianism is that no one knows all future consequences of your actions. Bentham’s goal was to make happiness the ultimate goal. Even though I’m against utilitarianism; there are still pros to this theory. This theory is straightforward and based on the single principle of minimizing pain and maximizing pleasure and happiness, and the theory does work to an extent. This theory was created to measure the overall happiness of people and how the consequences work to people’s advantage. The theory worked in the past but after so many years people have questioned it through various amount of loopholes and whether it actually works. In the present people have evolved to understand the difference between a kind person and pushover. The difference between those two kinds of people is what makes the theory that more confusing. That is why I am against the ethical theory of
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that states that an action is considered right as long as it promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. This theory was first proposed by Jeremy Bentham and later was refined by J.S Mill. Mill differs from Bentham by introducing a qualitative view on pleasure and makes a distinction between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. John Hospers critiques utilitarianism and shows that rule utilitarianism under more specific and stricter rules would promote utility better. Bernard Williams believes that utilitarianism is too demanding from people and instead believes virtue ethics is a better solution. Williams seems to have only considered act utilitarianism instead of rule utilitarianism, which may have better responses to the problems proposed by Williams. Sterling Hardwood purposes eleven objections to utilitarianism which can be used to help make compromise between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. I will argue that rule utilitarianism can be formed in such a way that it avoids the problems that arise from Williams, and Hardwood.
The Utilitarianism is the theory which fund the morality on the utility, and affirms that the true utilitity for and individual can't not always get along with the general utility. The utilitarianism fixes as a starting point the thought which recognize that one of the condition of human nature is to think firstly about his own interests: the morality consists in recognize that the utile of the single coincide with the utile of the others. Historically the Utilitarianism found himself in the English philosophy. The term ''utilitarianism'' was used for the first time by J. Bentham, and with that he designed the fundamental character of his own philosophic system. Bentham affirms also the need of all the utilitarian philosophies to create the ethic as an exact science: a rigorous calculus on the quantitative difference of the pleasures. The Utilitarianism broaden also in the juridical and political field, with the proposition of radical reforms. It was then the ce...
The goal is to achieve happiness and to avoid pain. He believed that a self-gratifying worth in acting derives from how a person feels, the length it last, the certainty, results that follow after taking actions, the benefits, and avoidance of any form of negative outcome. The methods of utility describe the meaning of moral obligation. This is refereed the happiness for all affected by the action taken. Bentham indicates that social policies are exanimated by the effectiveness it has on the general population that is involved. However, Mills utilitarianism on moral theory is an extension from Bentham’s view. He suggested some improvements to Bentham’s structure, meaning, and application (Philosophy Pages,
In general, the term utilitarianism can be defined as the ethical or right action is the one that results in the greatest good for the greatest number. Therefore, some people suggest that rightness or wrongness is determine by numbers that are total the positives and the negatives outcome of an action or the one that produces the highest score of positives or negatives that is the most ethical, or right, thing to do (Neher, W. W. Sandin, P.J., 2007, p. 61).
Jeremy Bentham, one of the founders of Utilitarianism, believed his philosophy could provide for the “greatest happiness of the greatest number of people”. However benign it may sound, at the heart of Utilitarianism is a cold, teleological process which reduces happiness to a mere commodity. It is even worse that Saul Alinsky would extend this philosophy to a point where the truth becomes relative, justice becomes a tool of those powerful enough to wield it, and any means are justified to reach one’s desired ends.
Nineteenth century British philosophers, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill sum up their theory of Utilitarianism, or the “principle of utility,” which is defined as, “actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Munson, 2012, p. 863). This theory’s main focus is to observe the consequences of an action(s), rather than the action itself. The utility, or usef...
Jeremy Bentham is widely regarded as the father of utilitarianism. He was born in 1748 into a family of lawyers and was himself, training to join the profession. During this process however, he became disillusioned by the state British law was in and set out to reform the system into a perfect one based on the ‘Greatest Happiness Principle,’ ‘the idea that pleasurable consequences are what qualify an action as being morally good’. Bentham observed that we are all governed by pain and pleasure; we all naturally aim to seek pleasure and avoid pain. He then decided that the best moral principle for governing our lives is one which uses this, the ‘Greatest Happiness Principle.’ This is that the amount of overall happiness or unhappiness that is caused by an action should determine whether an action is right or wrong. He stated,
Classical utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory which holds that an action can only be considered as morally right where its consequences bring about the greatest amount of good to the greatest number (where 'good' is equal to pleasure minus pain). Likewise, an action is morally wrong where it fails to maximise good. Since it was first articulated in the late 19th Century by the likes of Jeremy Bentham and later John Stewart Mill, the classical approach to utilitarianism has since become the basis for many other consequentialist theories such as rule-utilitarianism and act-utilitarianism upon which this essay will focus (Driver, 2009). Though birthed from the same utilitarian principle of maximising good, rule-utilitarianism and act-utilitarianism provide two very different accounts on how the maximising of good should be approached. This essay will compare these two approaches and try to ascertain whether rule-utilitarianism is indeed preferable to act-utilitarianism.
In its political philosophy utilitarianism provides an alternative to theories of natural law and the social contract by basing the authority of government and the sanctity of individual rights upon their utility, or measure of happiness gained. As an egalitarian doctrine, where everyone’s happiness counts equally, the rational, relatively straightforward nature of utilitarianism offers an attractive model for democratic government. It offers practical methods for deciding the morally right course of action - “...an action is right as it tends to promote happiness, wrong as it tends to diminish it, for the party whose interests are in question” (Bentham, 1780). To discover what we should do in a given situation, we identify the various courses of action that we could take, then determine any foreseeable benefits and harms to all affected by the ramifications of our decision. In fact, some of the early pioneers of utilitarianism, such as Bentham and Mill, campaigned for equality in terms of women's suffrage, decriminalization of homosexuality, and abolition of slavery (Boralevi, 1984). Utilitarianism seems to support democracy as one could interpret governments working to promote the public interest and welfare of citizens as striving for liberty for the greatest amount of people. While utilitarianism at its heart is a theory that calls for progressive social change through peaceful political processes, there are some difficulties in relying on it as the sole method for moral decision-making. In this essay I will assess the effectiveness of utilitarianism as a philosophy of government by examining the arguments against it.
As a philosophical approach, utilitarianism generally focuses on the principle of “greatest happiness”. According to the greatest happiness principle, actions that promote overall happiness and pleasure are considered as right practices. Moreover, to Mill, actions which enhance happiness are morally right, on the other hand, actions that produce undesirable and unhappy outcomes are considered as morally wrong. From this point of view we can deduct that utilitarianism assign us moral duties and variety of ways for maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain to ensure “greatest happiness principle”. Despite all of moral duties and obligations, utilitarian perspective have many specific challenges that pose several serious threats which constitute variety of arguments in this essay to utilitarianism and specifically Mill answers these challenges in his work. These arguments can be determinated and analyzed as three crucial points that seriously challenges utilitarianism. The first issue can be entitled like that utilitarian idea sets too demanding conditions as to act by motive which always serves maximizing overall happiness. It creates single criterion about “being motived to maximize overall happiness” but moral rightness which are unattainable to pursue in case of the maximizing benefit principle challenges utilitarianism. Secondly, the idea which may related with the first argument but differs from the first idea about single criterion issue, utilitarianism demands people to consider and measuring everything which taking place around before people practice their actions. It leads criticism to utilitarianism since the approach sees human-beings as calculators to attain greatest happiness principle without considering cultural differ...
The ethical theory of utilitarianism is associated with the philosopher Jeremy Bentham. Utilitarianism essentially is the theory that good is what causes a person pleasure and evil is what causes a person pain. Bentham’s utilitarianism is sometimes titled Act Utilitarianism because it focuses on individual actions A “right” action, according to Betham, is one that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Where a “wrong” action is one that would cause more pain than pleasure. Before a person commits an action, they should look at the consequences that it can have on the individual and others. Hedonic Calculus is a method in determining how much pleasure or pain an action will elicit. Hedonic Calculus consists of seven criteria including intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity and extent. Each criteria can be given a score between -10 (worst pain) to +10 (highest pleasure). The action becomes ethical and moral if there is an overall net happiness for everyone that is affected. An acti...
Bentham’s Utilitarianism sees the highest good as the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Jeremy Bentham believed that by adding up the amounts of pleasure and pain for each possible act we should be able to choose the good thing to do. Happiness equaled pleasure minus pain. Bentham provided a way of measuring pleasure and pain, he called it the hedonic calculus. There are seven criteria to this calculus. First being the intensity being measured – how strong is the pleasure. The second criteria, duration – how long will the pleasure last. The third, certainty – how likely or unlikely is the pleasure. Fourth, Propinquity - How far off in the future is the pleasure or pain. The fifth, fecundity – what is the likely hood that a succession of pleasure will follow. The sixth criteria, purity – What is the probability that the pain will lead to other pain. Lastly, is the extent – how many people will be affected. This calculus gave Bentham a method of testing whether an action is morally right in that if it was good it would result in the most pleasurable outcome, having weighed up all the elements. These factors weigh up the potential amount of pleasure or pain which might arise from moral actions to decide which would be the best option to take. Ideally this formula should determine which act has the best tendency and is therefore
Over time, the actions of mankind have been the victim of two vague labels, right and wrong. The criteria for these labels are not clearly defined, but they still seem to be the standard by which the actions of man are judged. There are some people that abide by a deontological view when it comes to judging the nature of actions; the deontological view holds that it is a person's intention that makes an action right or wrong. On the other hand there is the teleological view which holds that it is the result of an action is what makes that act right or wrong. In this essay I will be dealing with utilitarianism, a philosophical principle that holds a teleological view when it comes the nature of actions. To solely discuss utilitarianism is much too broad of topic and must be broken down, so I will discuss specifically quantitative utilitarianism as presented by Jeremy Bentham. In this essay I will present the argument of Bentham supporting his respective form of utilitarianism and I will give my critique of this argument along the way.
Both Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, had thoughts of the Principle of Utility and what it should be like. Bentham believes that the Principle of Utility depends on pain and pleasure and Mill believes that the Principle of Utility depends on higher pleasures and lower pleasures. Pain meaning evil and pleasure meaning good or greater benefits and higher pleasures meaning that action was good which would lead to a higher level of happiness and lower pleasures meaning bad which would lead to a decreasing level of happiness. Therefore, a normative ethical theory that has come through from this and it is Utilitarianism. The definition of Utilitarianism is a course of action that maximizes the total
Using the utilitarian approach, one weighs the good and bad consequences when considering an action. If the good outweighs the bad, it is generally a good decision. This moral reasoning exists when a person ponders the consequences of an action by using utilitarian calculus. This is where an ethical math measures the consequences in the measurement of hedons (positives) and dolors (negatives). “For Bentham, pleasure and pain serve not only as explanations for action, but they also define one’s moral. It is, in short, on the basis of pleasures and pains, which can exist only in individuals, that Bentham thought one could construct a calculus of value”