Utilitarianism Essay

Utilitarianism is zdefined, as the right way to act is one that maximizes your happiness, (pleasure and happiness is the absence of pain) while the wrong way is one that produces the opposite i.e. pain. Unhappiness here is defined as pain or the opposite of happiness. This is the basis of utilitarianism or what Mill calls the “greatest happiness principle” and it is the best ethical theory by which humans should follow. The argument for the above is as follows

(1) Humans need a way to assess whether their actions are right or wrong
(2) Right and wrong are defined as either what promotes happiness (pleasure) or pain (unhappiness)
________________________________________________________________________________________
(3) Therefore, we judge our actions if they are moral or immoral by the amount of happiness they create (a good action) or wrong if they create pain and suffering (unhappiness)-----Utilitarianism

I would like the reader to understand this need to assess our action is not necessarily a conscious and deliberate action that we take, but more from a philosophical questioning when we discuss ethics and which ethical theory is the best. Also, I used in the above the word pleasure, but here pleasure is not referring strictly to our bodily sensation but more our satisfaction and well-being like what Mill has discussed “intellectual pleasures”. This does not mean pleasure here is not hedonistic in nature in the sense the word is used but rather an extension of the term. Lastly, to clarify for the reader the opposite of happiness is not sadness; it is in fact unhappiness or pain. Further, the words ethical and moral are being used interchangeably. The above argument presented can be extended as follows

(1) There is no ...

... middle of paper ...

... affected are always different. This explains the above paradox as to how two people committing the same action and one being deemed moral the other immoral. The issue of precedence however is irrelevant because there exists a standard of actions agreed upon throughout history that is unethical, example, killing children. What is being referred to here is everyday decisions and actions that we must take and not objective morals that are probably agreed upon by all ethical theories (this is speculative). To address the second part of the objection, the reader must understand that in everyday situations when a decision needs to be made, we almost unconsciously assess what are the ramifications of our actions, its part of our nature to look for things that as Mill calls “desirable as ends” .