What is the moral theory of utilitarianism? According to Vaughn, “[Utilitarianism is] the view that right actions are those that result in the greatest overall happiness for everyone involved” (Vaughn, 79). At face value such a moral theory sounds great, because it should promote general happiness. While this is true, a particular argument, the telishment argument, shows that utilitarianism is not a viable moral theory because it promotes decisions that run contrary to historical moral inclinations. To prove this is the case, this paper will first dive into what happiness means in the utilitarian sense, the telishment argument itself, what points of contention the tellishment argument brings up against utilitarianism, and finally, what utilitarianism has to say in its own defense.
Before the tellishment argument can be considered, one must ask what happiness is in the utilitarian sense. According to John Mill’s Utilitarianism, “There is no known Epicurean in the theory of …show more content…
One could try to say that because justice was not served, the decision did not fulfill the greatest happiness principle. However according to Mill it is not actual justice that needs to be served, but mere “moral sentiment” or the feeling that justice has been served, which according to this particular example, is the case (Mill, 82). Not to mention if justice can be equated with a right action, then utilitarianism should be able to say what that right action is; if it cannot, then it is not a valid moral theory. According to Vaughn, “[proponents of utilitarianism] say, that actions that seem to conflict with our moral intuitions almost always produce such bad consequences that the actions cannot be justified even on utilitarian grounds” (Vaughn, 79). If that is so, then why not stick with moral theories that are consistent with “our moral
Before the tellishment argument can be considered, one must ask what happiness is in the utilitarian sense. According to John Mill’s Utilitarianism, “There is no known Epicurean in the theory of …show more content…
One could try to say that because justice was not served, the decision did not fulfill the greatest happiness principle. However according to Mill it is not actual justice that needs to be served, but mere “moral sentiment” or the feeling that justice has been served, which according to this particular example, is the case (Mill, 82). Not to mention if justice can be equated with a right action, then utilitarianism should be able to say what that right action is; if it cannot, then it is not a valid moral theory. According to Vaughn, “[proponents of utilitarianism] say, that actions that seem to conflict with our moral intuitions almost always produce such bad consequences that the actions cannot be justified even on utilitarian grounds” (Vaughn, 79). If that is so, then why not stick with moral theories that are consistent with “our moral