Normative theories
Similarities and Differences between the Rule and Act Utilitarianism
Human life entirely runs by different actions that we take each day. The activities are centered on what can benefit us as individuals or a group. When the benefit is derived, we get happy, and those who fail to get the benefit of their action are disadvantaged hence they get unhappy. Such disparity forms the routes of various arguments found in both ancient and modern ethical philosophy. In pursuit of deciding the moral reason for any action act and rule utilitarian have been argued out by many scholars. This write up will draw the similarities and differences between the rule and act utilitarian with relevant scenarios for each thought.
Similarities between …show more content…
The inconsequential approach the main judgment is based on the consequences of the action. This fact forms the basis that qualifies the two approaches as being connected. According to the work of ancient philosopher Jeremy Bentham a consequential theory has the foundation on the nature of the moral righteousness based on the outcome of the action, (Tom 56). Based on this evidence of evaluation actions have consequences, and the result can either be good or bad. For example, if a sick neighbor steals money to pay school fees for the kids the action is justified by act utilitarianism because it gives more people happiness than those who are getting the pain of losing money. However, on the concept of rule utilitarianism the poor man is wrong as stealing is condemned by …show more content…
A motorist was driving a bus with 14 passengers on board. Coincidentally a schoolboy was already crossing the road. The driver was faced with two dilemmas. One, if the driver engages the vehicle on the emergency brake, he would save the boy from the crush. However, the bus would be overthrown onto the adjacent river thus endangering the life of the 14 passengers on board. Again if he just drove and wretched the boy on the road, he would save his own life, the passengers and the bus from damage. So according to the principle of utility as applied by Bethany the greatest pleasure for the majority is fully achieved in the second option of killing the boy to save himself and the life of the people in the bus. Evaluating the action further seems to contradict the rule
Similarities and Differences between the Rule and Act Utilitarianism
Human life entirely runs by different actions that we take each day. The activities are centered on what can benefit us as individuals or a group. When the benefit is derived, we get happy, and those who fail to get the benefit of their action are disadvantaged hence they get unhappy. Such disparity forms the routes of various arguments found in both ancient and modern ethical philosophy. In pursuit of deciding the moral reason for any action act and rule utilitarian have been argued out by many scholars. This write up will draw the similarities and differences between the rule and act utilitarian with relevant scenarios for each thought.
Similarities between …show more content…
The inconsequential approach the main judgment is based on the consequences of the action. This fact forms the basis that qualifies the two approaches as being connected. According to the work of ancient philosopher Jeremy Bentham a consequential theory has the foundation on the nature of the moral righteousness based on the outcome of the action, (Tom 56). Based on this evidence of evaluation actions have consequences, and the result can either be good or bad. For example, if a sick neighbor steals money to pay school fees for the kids the action is justified by act utilitarianism because it gives more people happiness than those who are getting the pain of losing money. However, on the concept of rule utilitarianism the poor man is wrong as stealing is condemned by …show more content…
A motorist was driving a bus with 14 passengers on board. Coincidentally a schoolboy was already crossing the road. The driver was faced with two dilemmas. One, if the driver engages the vehicle on the emergency brake, he would save the boy from the crush. However, the bus would be overthrown onto the adjacent river thus endangering the life of the 14 passengers on board. Again if he just drove and wretched the boy on the road, he would save his own life, the passengers and the bus from damage. So according to the principle of utility as applied by Bethany the greatest pleasure for the majority is fully achieved in the second option of killing the boy to save himself and the life of the people in the bus. Evaluating the action further seems to contradict the rule