In Philosophical Ethics, Utilitarianism is the doctrine that our actions are right if the outcome of our actions generate the greatest happiness amongst the majority. However, in “What is Wrong with Slavery?” some objectors of utilitarianism have tried to dismiss this moral reasoning as to having any importance by blaming the awful actions of slave traders and slave owners on utilitarianism. They attack this doctrine by saying that utilitarianism is a belief system that can either praise or condemn slavery, and utilitarianism easily commend slavery if a majority of the people visualize a slave-owning society as the most beneficial and generate greatest happiness. In this matter, the slave owners and slave traders can say that slavery is the right action because it generates the greatest happiness amongst themselves, because they may be in the illusion that they represent the majority. In response to these anti-utilitarian’s, R.M. Hare defends Unitarianism through the rebuttal of the anti-utilitarian’s claims. Hare agrees that the nature of utilitarianism can either commend or condemn slavery, but a key factor that anti-utilitarians forget is that utilitarianism shows what is wrong with slavery through reasoning, instead of just bluntly saying slavery is wrong without any proof.
Throughout the paper, Hare reiterates the example of how sometimes people can claim that they face injustice by spouting out actions or events that they believe is an unjust to them, without providing any substantial evidence or reasons as to why these actions causes them injustice. He explains how this example construes as a bad argument with weak conclusions, providing unsubstantial ideas to society. Before Hare even goes into the rebuttal of the claim...
... middle of paper ...
...ve them this upper hand over another human being? Hare says even a good human will exploit the people who are under them just because they possess the power to do so. Not only that, but Hare and other utilitarians know for a fact that if both an animal and a slave are a man’s property, and both receive the same punishment, the damage is always much worst on a slave. This is because slaves have thoughts, feelings, and responsibility – he is the same species as his owner yet he cannot escape.
Hare says in order to show the wrongfulness of slavery, the world has to see slavery as what is actually is and he conveys this through examples of historical context. Hare’s defense of utilitarianism is that this doctrine is moral reasoning that can be used to show and prove what is wrong with slavery, instead of simply just showing dissent and spouting out cries of unjust.
In the article, Slavery and Freedom: The American Paradox by Edmund S. Morgan, he begins explaining the impacts and the role of slavery in American history. Morgan suggests that the impact of slavery should not be over looked. The central idea of this article is focused around liberty and equality being joined by slavery throughout history. These contradictory ideas were developing independently at an identical period of time. Morgan expounds upon this idea.
In Aristotle's "Justifying Slavery" and Seneca's "On Master and Slave," the two authors express their opposing sentiments on the principles of slavery. While Aristotle describes slavery as predestined inferiority, evidenced greatly by physical attributes, Seneca emphasizes the importance of "philosophical" freedom as opposed to physical freedom. (p. 58). The authors' contrasting views are disclosed in their judgments on the morality of slavery, the degree of freedom all people possess at birth, and the balance of equality between a slave and his master.
The use of labor came in two forms; indenture servitude and Slavery used on plantations in the south particularly in Virginia. The southern colonies such as Virginia were based on a plantation economy due to factors such as fertile soil and arable land that can be used to grow important crops, the plantations in the south demanded rigorous amounts of labor and required large amounts of time, the plantation owners had to employ laborers in order to grow crops and sell them to make a profit. Labor had become needed on the plantation system and in order to extract cheap labor slaves were brought to the south in order to work on the plantations. The shift from indentured servitude to slavery was an important time as well as the factors that contributed to that shift, this shift affected the future generations of African American descent. The history of colonial settlements involved altercations and many compromises, such as Bacons Rebellion, and slavery one of the most debated topics in the history of the United States of America. The different problems that occurred in the past has molded into what is the United States of America, the reflection in the past provides the vast amount of effort made by the settlers to make a place that was worth living on and worth exploring.
Analysis of Arguments for the Slavery Institution. The foundation of this paper will highlight the following questions: How might southern apologists for slavery have used the northern “wage slave” discussed in the last chapter to justify slavery? To what extent do you agree with this argument? How did slaves use religious belief and kinship to temper their plight?
In studying the Southern defense of slavery, it appears that southerners were defending a way of life. Many believed that the institution of slavery was the lesser of two evils in terms of providing benefits for workers, others believed that it was at the very foundation of a free society to own slaves and still others saw it merely as an expedient means to an economic end. Although one may acknowledge that the South had understandable political, social and religious reasons for supporting the institution of slavery, the fundamental moral obligation to treat all humans as equals supercedes them all.
“The right to have a slave implies the right in some one to make a slave; that right must be equal and mutual, and this would resolve society into a state of perpetual war.” Senator William Steward, an anti-slavery supporter, issued this claim in his “There is a Higher Law than the Constitution” speech. Steward, like all abolitionist, viewed all of man as equals. This equality came from the “higher law” that is the Bible. Since all men were created by God then all men were equals in God’s eyes. Abolitionist believed that whites had no more right to make a slave out of a African American than the African American had to make a slave out of a white man.
The slave system “is pronounced to be sinful and odious, in the sight of God and man” (Slavery as a Positive Good). I am here to tell you today why this is such a false statement. I cannot sit here in silence as the people of this nation destroy the Union under which we live. I will not allow for the abolitionists to win this fight, because if they do our nation will fall apart. “Abolition and the Union cannot coexist. As the friend of the Union I openly proclaim it – and the sooner it is known the better” (Slavery as a Positive Good). The Union and Abolition cannot coexist, it’s as simple as that, one will fail if the other exists.
Many people agree on the fact that society needs to act with a sense of morality. However, there are differing opinions on how to go about this. One popular idea is that a person should always consider the greater good of society in order to be moral. This moral principle is known as utilitarianism. The end result of this theory is happiness for all, which appeals to many people, since happiness is typically a goal everyone can agree to strive towards. The following examines the approach of utilitarianism from the perspective of John Stuart Mils, as well as looks its strengths and weakness’s through a thought argument, to demonstrate how this is played out in society.
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.
The institution of slavery has existed throughout the history of humanity, although it's configuration has continuously transformed over time. Slavery played a major role in the United States, due to being economically advantageous to the South. America's Civil War, partly due to the issue of slavery, nearly brought the young nation to its knees, in face of utter and complete destruction. Slavery has played a pivotal, yet sinister, role in the development of the United States. The 55th Governor of South Carolina, George McDuffie, held strong views in his support of the institution of slavery. He used his address to the state legislature in 1835 to express his views on slavery and justifications for the institution. McDuffie used religion as a means for legitimizing slavery and continued to fight against external pressures to abolish the institution.
Slavery is a system under which people are treated as property to be bought and sold, and are forced to work. Slavery was cruelty at its best. Slavery is described as long work days, a lack of respect for a human being, and the inability for a man or a woman to have gainful employment. The slaves were victimized the most for obvious reasons. Next on the list would be the families of both the slave and slave owners. At the bottom of the list would be the slave owners. Slavery does in fact victimize slaves, slave owner and their families by repeating the same cycle every generation.
Philosophy has offered many works and debates on morality and ethics. One of these works is the concept of utilitarianism. One of the most prominent writers on the theory of utilitarianism is John Stuart Mill. He suggests that utilitarianism may be the guide for morality. His writing on utilitarianism transcends through the present in relation to the famous movie The Matrix. In the movie, people live in a virtual reality where they are relatively happy and content and the real world is filled with a constant struggle to survive. The movie revolves around Neo, who tries to free people from the virtual world in which they live. In light of utilitarianism, freeing these people would be morally wrong. In this essay, I will first explain John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism and some objections it faces. I will then talk about utilitarianism’s relation to The Matrix and why it would be morally wrong to free the people and subject them to the real world.
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...
In this essay I will define what utilitarianism is and explain the utilitarian moral theory. In order to define utilitarianism one/we should have an understanding of what Mill means by utility. Many people believe that utility could be defined as the opposite of pleasure. This popular opinion would be incorrect according to Mill. He argues that in order for this accusation to be true it would mean that humans would never experience pain. Mill says that “Utility is pleasure itself with the exemption of pain (Mill 262).
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.