Complications Of Jeremy Bentham's Theory Of Utilitarianism

911 Words 4 Pages
As humans, we typically live under two extremes in life, pain being the extreme we least desire, and pleasure being the extreme we most desire. Utilitarianism is considered to be a consequential and technological theory that holds the notion, that all actions should be judged in terms of his need in promoting the great is good for the greatest number of people. “Jeremy Bentham believe that you are Utilitarianism could be divided into three parts, he believe that humans was driven by the principles of unity, hedonic calculus, consist of how good or bad in action is in term of this consequences. For example, when we think about anything that we do in life we always consider the consequences of our actions whether the consequences bring happiness …show more content…
Its duration, how long will the pain or pleasure last, because as human, too much of anything can become annoying, we are never satisfied this would include pleasure, its certainty, there will be pain and pleasure in life, uncertainty, the general nature in life was suggest that there would be pain or pleasure and your actions would decide the consequences whether there be pain or pleasure for the individual? Its propinquity, (or how near are far the pleasure), its fecundity, in life there is always pleasure, but how soon the pain follow just as everything that goes up must come down, this is the nature as it is defined by man. (How likely is one pleasure to be followed by other pleasures or pain), generally speaking the probability of one having pleasure, surely pain is to …show more content…
To sum things up for consequences would be the greatest happiness for the greatest number? Is following morality the right thing to do? That question will always be asked because what is morally right for one group of people may be wrong for the other, and morally speaking, we as people believe is better to lose one life than to lose 5 lives. What if this one person you decide to kill was a very important person but his time in history had not arrived yet, by his continuing to live this would ultimately save millions of lives by providing a cure to AIDS had he lived. This is why moral acts are not the best way to go. When we take the life of one, for the life of many, this in fact may not be a good idea, because we don’t know what goals that one person would accomplish had he lived. Now do you believe that is right to take the life of one instead of the life of many? I believe in this situation you play it by heart and allow God to move your hand in the way that he choose fit, because ultimately this is not a decision for man to have another man’s life in his hand to choose life or death. Although, as man we like playing God in heaven the power to control what happens to another, but this is a situation that most men would not want to take into account. As most of us would believe in the President of the United States would be a great job to have, but ultimately the

Related Documents