In Chinese tradition, the obligation between relationships was emphasized. By maintaining it, one can culture his virtues and pass on to his offspring, benefiting the whole society. Among kinds of relationships, the parents-son and husband-wife relationships are considered as the most important. The former one cultivates one’s benevolence, the latter one is the starting point of humanity. There is then a hypothetical dilemma between the two relationships: the choice to be made when one's mother and his wife fell into a river while neither of them can swim but he can only save one. No matter who was chosen to be saved, he cannot escape the suffering of losing an important person in his life. This essay will argue to save the mother if it is
…show more content…
It was argued that the wife can accompany her husband and share the duty of raising their kids but the mother is aged and may die soon even she was saved, therefore saving the wife can bring a best consequence for the son. Although it may be true that the wife can be his companion for a longer time than his mother could, it is not necessarily a best choice to save the wife first under utilitarianism. According to Jeremy Bentham’s Principle of Utility, we should always choose the action that has the best consequence for everyone concerned, but not only an individual (Rachels, 2014). The mother may have many close friends or relatives while the social circle of the wife is relatively narrow due to her younger age. Therefore, more people would be involved and more sorrow would be induced if the son chooses to save his wife instead of his mother. It shows that saving the wife first may not maximize the utility for everyone concerned. It is also not true that a best consequence can be brought to the son. This is because the grief from his innermost heart cannot be simply overcome by the pleasure of his wife's companion. Comparing two choices, saving the wife cannot prevent greater unhappiness or bringing a best consequence for everyone concerned than saving the mother. In the sight of utilitarianism, the argument against saving mother is
It was argued that the wife can accompany her husband and share the duty of raising their kids but the mother is aged and may die soon even she was saved, therefore saving the wife can bring a best consequence for the son. Although it may be true that the wife can be his companion for a longer time than his mother could, it is not necessarily a best choice to save the wife first under utilitarianism. According to Jeremy Bentham’s Principle of Utility, we should always choose the action that has the best consequence for everyone concerned, but not only an individual (Rachels, 2014). The mother may have many close friends or relatives while the social circle of the wife is relatively narrow due to her younger age. Therefore, more people would be involved and more sorrow would be induced if the son chooses to save his wife instead of his mother. It shows that saving the wife first may not maximize the utility for everyone concerned. It is also not true that a best consequence can be brought to the son. This is because the grief from his innermost heart cannot be simply overcome by the pleasure of his wife's companion. Comparing two choices, saving the wife cannot prevent greater unhappiness or bringing a best consequence for everyone concerned than saving the mother. In the sight of utilitarianism, the argument against saving mother is