There are numerous views and opinions regarding the field of philosophy, in particularly the different ethical theories. I am going to explain the main idea as well as discuss the differences between the utilitarianism, the deontological, and the virtue-ethical theories of morality by presenting what I find to be the strengths and weaknesses of each theory.
Utilitarianism
The first general ethical theory I am going to discuss is the utilitarian theory. Simply put, utilitarianism is doing what will benefit the most people and cause the most happiness or pleasure. For example, assume you won the lottery and have one million dollars in cash. The utilitarian would argue that you should give all of that money away to people who may need it
…show more content…
Bentham distinguished two main features of utilitarianism- the consequentialist principle and the utility principle. The consequentialist principle argues that you can determine what is right or wrong by what results follow your action; if what follows your action is good then you did what is right whereas if what follows is bad, you did the wrong thing. The utility principle says that what is right or wrong can simply be determined from the feeling produced from the act. If your actions bring you happiness or joy for example, you did what is right. Bentham also developed the hedonic calculus, a method for measuring pleasure and pain. His formula, which sums up the seven aspects of a pleasurable or painful experience, is a way to quantitatively measure an experience. The biggest strength of Bentham’s theory, in my opinion, is the simplicity of it. Simply do what brings the most joy and pleasure to the most people. The problem I have with this theory is how does one really quantify or measure pleasure or even pain for that matter? For one, people do not always agree on what is pleasurable and what is painful. For example I may find lying out in the hot sun painful, but many people would argue that they find sun bathing relaxing and peaceful. Further, even if everyone did agree (which they don’t) on what is pleasurable or painful I may think that something is …show more content…
It would argue that the results or consequences of your actions have no bearing on the rightness or wrongness of the act but rather the action itself is determined to be right or wrong under a set of rules. For example let’s assume you promised your mother you would buy her a house one day. You finally have the money to make good on you promise and buy your mom a new house but you start to debate if it is the right thing to do since your mother already lives very comfortably, maybe you should give the money to people who need it more. The utilitarian would say give the money away since it bring more people happiness or utility whereas the deontologist would argue that you should keep your promise and buy your mother the house. They would argue that breaking your promise is wrongful even if it may bring more people happiness in the
Ethical theories may be usefully divided into two main types, deontological or eudaimonist, on the basis of whether they take one or the other of these kinds of judgments as primary. (1) In the main, ancient ethical theories were eudaimonist in both form and content (in the kinds of judgments and terms they took as primary, and in the questions they spent the most time investigating). Most modern ethical theories have been deontological, again in both form and content. (2) Aristotle’s central question is: What is the good life for a human being? Kant and Mill’s central question is: What are our duties to our fellow human beings? My second main contention, which I cannot fully argue for here, is that neither type of theory trumps the other, nor should we attempt to subsume both types under some higher ethical synthesis.
What is ethics? Ethics are the philosophical principles of good verses bad moral behavior. It is a guideline to help people make decisions or make a judgment calls. There are two main types of ethical principles that will be discussed in this paper, and how they are applied to the decision making process. They are Deontological and Utilitarian. Deontological ethics are based on the righteousness or wrongness of the action-taking place. It does not base itself on the bad or good consequences that come from the action. Immanuel Kant introduced deontological ethics in the 18th century. Kant believed that every decision or action made by a person had to be evaluated by his or her moral duty. He stated that humanity shouldn’t side on its
The Virtue, Utilitarianism, and Deontological concepts all have something in a common. Each one of these three concepts concentrates on an individual’s actions leading to various options, in addition to how the options affected others. The variations within each of these concepts are who engaged and was impacted by those options. The Virtue concept concentrates on an individual's character. One could stay in their lifestyle by seeking quality in everything they and others do (Boylan, 2009). The Utilitarianism concept considers that an activity, which is created to the advantage of a team, is fairly appropriate, if it delivers the biggest advantage to that team (Boylan, 2009). Utilitarianism is frequently known through the motto, “The biggest excellent for the biggest variety (Boylan, 2009).” between the three theories, Deontology is the most different. This concept moves around ones choice to control. Deontologists create options depending on understanding that something is right without concern to the higher excellent of others (Boylan, 2009).
In Utilitarianism, J.S. Mill gives an account for the reasons one must abide by the principles of Utilitarianism. Also referred to as the Greatest-happiness Principle, this doctrine promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. More specifically, Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, holding that the right act is that which yields the greatest net utility, or "the total amount of pleasure minus the total amount of pain", for all individuals affected by said act (Joyce, lecture notes from 03/30).
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).
Ethics can be defined as "the conscious reflection on our moral beliefs with the aim of improving, extending or refining those beliefs in some way." (Dodds, Lecture 2) Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism are two theories that attempt to answer the ethical nature of human beings. This paper will attempt to explain how and why Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism differ as well as discuss why I believe Kant's theory provides a more plausible account of ethics.
There are many essays, papers and books written on the concept of right and wrong. Philosophers have theorized about moral actions for eons, one such philosopher is John Stuart Mill. In his book Utilitarianism he tries to improve on the theories of utilitarianism from previous philosophers, as he is a strong believer himself in the theory. In Mill's book he presents the ideology that there is another branch on the utilitarian tree. This branch being called rule-utilitarianism. Mill makes a distinction between two different types of utilitarianism; act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism. Rule-utilitarianism seems like a major advance over the simple theory of act-utilitarianism. But for all its added complexity, it may not actually be a significant improvement. This is proven when looking at the flaws in act-utilitarianism and relating them to the ways in which rule-utilitarianism tries to overcome them. As well one must look at the obstacles that rule-utilitarianism has on it's own as a theory. The problems of both act and rule utilitarianism consist of being too permissive and being able to justify any crime, not being able to predict the outcomes of one's actions, non-universality and the lose of freewill.
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.
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...
Utilitarianism is a theory aimed at defining one simple basis that can be applied when making any ethical decision. It is based on a human’s natural instinct to seek pleasure and avoid pain.
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
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...
In this paper, I argue about the applicability of virtue ethics which is one of three major branches of normative ethics. The subject of virtue ethics is normally defined as one that puts emphasis on virtues which are also known as moral character. The branch is in contrast to the majority of the approaches which places a lot of emphasizes on responsibilities and rules. The practice is also known as deontology or the practice which emphasizes on the results of actions. It is also known as consequentialism (Swanton,11).The way virtue ethics is applied in modern philosophy should be clearly evaluated.
Utilitarianism can be described as an ethical theory that states if the consequences of an action
This means that a person will follow his or her obligations to another individual or society because upholding one 's duty is what is considered ethically correct (1,2). For instance, a deontologist will always keep his promises to a friend and will follow the law. A person who follows this theory will produce very consistent decisions since they will be based on the individual 's set duties.” (Rainbow). Deontology works on the concept “the end does not justify the means” ("Difference Between Utilitarianism and Deontology."). I believe that I will use Deontology in many different situation throughout my life. In my personal life I may find myself in a situation where my friend asks me to pick up his son from school because my friend has another obligation to attend to. According to deontology, the morally correct option would be to pick up his son from school because I would be upholding my duty to my friend. If I did not uphold my duty to my friend by not picking up his son from school, it would be the morally wrong option according to deontology because I did not go through with my obligation. In my professional life I plan to be a pharmacist. Pharmacists have access to many different drugs. A friend could ask me to steal drugs for him. According to deontology, the morally correct option would be to tell my friend that I could not steal