Utilitarianism is a consequentialist ethical theory, which focuses on the happiness (or pleasure) of the majority- “the greatest good of the greatest number” (Bentham), making it a democratic theory. The main focus of Bentham’s utilitarianism was on happiness, whilst Mill was more concerned with pleasure.
The first advantage of utilitarianism is that it targeted the social needs of the time in 18th Century Britain and influenced many changes that met the needs of the poor working majority. Bentham had wanted to create a universal ethical theory that would fight the inequalities of the time and could be applied to all ethical situations, and an advantage of the theory is that it succeeded in accomplishing this. Tyler and Reid say that Bentham …show more content…
In strong rule utilitarianism, some rules, such as “do not murder” must always be followed, irrespective of the circumstances and consequences. However, some argue that this does not fit with classical utilitarianism, which says that no actions should be forbidden, and therefore say that it can no longer be considered as actual utilitarianism.
On the other hand, weak rule utilitarianism says that there can be some exceptions, but this also has its own problems. Firstly, it is not easy to decide what should and should not be an exception, making it a hard theory to follow. Secondly, it also means that a group of sadists inflicting pain on one person could be justified as the “immediate satisfaction takes precedence over a rule that does not hold for the people concerned” (Thompson).
As well as rule utilitarianism, preference utilitarianism also aims to address some of the issues presented by classical utilitarianism. Preference utilitarianism is focused on the satisfaction of people’s preferences, rather than achieving “the greatest balance of pleasure over pain” (Tyler). Preference utilitarianism addresses the issue of utilitarianism only focusing on pleasure and happiness, despite other values being very important, as it is based on people’s preferences, some of which may not have anything to do with experiencing happiness or …show more content…
It is acceptable as it is easy to understand, and can be easily applied to all ethical situations. It is also a democratic theory, as it considers the majority. However, it can be seen that there are more problems than advantages, as it is very hard to predict consequences accurately and Bentham’s hedonic calculus is hard and impractical to use. On top of this, any action can be justified, and although this is ‘solved’ by strong rule utilitarianism, which proposes some rules to always be followed, it can be argued that strong rule utilitarianism is therefore no longer truly utilitarianism. Therefore, it is clear that the problems of utilitarianism make it more unacceptable than
The first advantage of utilitarianism is that it targeted the social needs of the time in 18th Century Britain and influenced many changes that met the needs of the poor working majority. Bentham had wanted to create a universal ethical theory that would fight the inequalities of the time and could be applied to all ethical situations, and an advantage of the theory is that it succeeded in accomplishing this. Tyler and Reid say that Bentham …show more content…
In strong rule utilitarianism, some rules, such as “do not murder” must always be followed, irrespective of the circumstances and consequences. However, some argue that this does not fit with classical utilitarianism, which says that no actions should be forbidden, and therefore say that it can no longer be considered as actual utilitarianism.
On the other hand, weak rule utilitarianism says that there can be some exceptions, but this also has its own problems. Firstly, it is not easy to decide what should and should not be an exception, making it a hard theory to follow. Secondly, it also means that a group of sadists inflicting pain on one person could be justified as the “immediate satisfaction takes precedence over a rule that does not hold for the people concerned” (Thompson).
As well as rule utilitarianism, preference utilitarianism also aims to address some of the issues presented by classical utilitarianism. Preference utilitarianism is focused on the satisfaction of people’s preferences, rather than achieving “the greatest balance of pleasure over pain” (Tyler). Preference utilitarianism addresses the issue of utilitarianism only focusing on pleasure and happiness, despite other values being very important, as it is based on people’s preferences, some of which may not have anything to do with experiencing happiness or …show more content…
It is acceptable as it is easy to understand, and can be easily applied to all ethical situations. It is also a democratic theory, as it considers the majority. However, it can be seen that there are more problems than advantages, as it is very hard to predict consequences accurately and Bentham’s hedonic calculus is hard and impractical to use. On top of this, any action can be justified, and although this is ‘solved’ by strong rule utilitarianism, which proposes some rules to always be followed, it can be argued that strong rule utilitarianism is therefore no longer truly utilitarianism. Therefore, it is clear that the problems of utilitarianism make it more unacceptable than