Stealing to survive
How would a utilitarian respond to the dilemma of stealing to survive?
Utilitarianism is a normative theory and a teleological approach to morality. The theory states that motives do not matter and that the consequences are the only thing that should make you carry out an act. The foundation of utilitarianism is the Greatest Happiness Principle which has three sections. The hedonic principle is when morality is judged by this theory by the amount of aggregate pleasure or happiness and the least aggregate pain or unhappiness an act produces, the more morally admirable it is. Consequentialism is when the consequences of an action are used to calculate its moral worth. The better the consequences, the more moral worth the act …show more content…
Only Act and Rule Utilitarianism apply to this “stealing to survive” scenario. Act utilitarianism states that we should judge each individual scenario and decide which action to take according to the scenario. Rule utilitarianism states that we should follow general set rules of conduct which have, in the past, produced good results. An example showing the differences between the two is if someone left their wallet on the train. If you saw the wallet had money in it, would you hand it into the police? An act utilitarian would say that it depends on the situation. If the wallet belonged to a very wealthy person who wouldn’t miss the money and the person who finds the wallet is a struggling single mother with four children. This might mean that the greatest happiness will result if you kept the money for yourself. However, this can be easily reversed if the rich person found the wallet; a different course of action would be taken. However, rule utilitarianism would not take the individual situation into consideration. Instead they would act on set rules and guidelines that have proven successful in similar situations in the past. The end consequence in this example would probably be to just hand the wallet into the police whatever your personal circumstances may
How would a utilitarian respond to the dilemma of stealing to survive?
Utilitarianism is a normative theory and a teleological approach to morality. The theory states that motives do not matter and that the consequences are the only thing that should make you carry out an act. The foundation of utilitarianism is the Greatest Happiness Principle which has three sections. The hedonic principle is when morality is judged by this theory by the amount of aggregate pleasure or happiness and the least aggregate pain or unhappiness an act produces, the more morally admirable it is. Consequentialism is when the consequences of an action are used to calculate its moral worth. The better the consequences, the more moral worth the act …show more content…
Only Act and Rule Utilitarianism apply to this “stealing to survive” scenario. Act utilitarianism states that we should judge each individual scenario and decide which action to take according to the scenario. Rule utilitarianism states that we should follow general set rules of conduct which have, in the past, produced good results. An example showing the differences between the two is if someone left their wallet on the train. If you saw the wallet had money in it, would you hand it into the police? An act utilitarian would say that it depends on the situation. If the wallet belonged to a very wealthy person who wouldn’t miss the money and the person who finds the wallet is a struggling single mother with four children. This might mean that the greatest happiness will result if you kept the money for yourself. However, this can be easily reversed if the rich person found the wallet; a different course of action would be taken. However, rule utilitarianism would not take the individual situation into consideration. Instead they would act on set rules and guidelines that have proven successful in similar situations in the past. The end consequence in this example would probably be to just hand the wallet into the police whatever your personal circumstances may