Utilitarianism Is It Right Or Wrong Essay

Superior Essays
Utilitarianism: Is It Right or Wrong How We do Things to make us Happy? Utilitarianism is the actions that are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness and wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness, or pain. By being happy, it is the intended pleasure and the absence of pain and by being unhappy, it is the pain and the privation of pleasure (Heydt). There are several varieties of utilitarianism. “Basically, a utilitarian approach to morality implies that no moral act (an act of stealing) or rule (“Keep your promises”) is intrinsically right or wrong. Rather, the rightness or wrongness of an act or rule is solely a matter of the overall nonmoral good (pleasure, happiness, health, knowledge, or satisfaction …show more content…
One reason they say the utilitarian way of doing things is bad/wrong is because even though we make less of a damage, we do not know what damage we will be doing for others, because do not think of the long-term consequences of our actions. Another objection they say is that is too demanding, that we usually act to promote good consequences, and that common sense morality is not demanding enough. “Critics attack utilitarianism’s commitment to impartiality and the equal consideration of interests. An implication of this commitment is that whenever people want to buy something for themselves or for a friend or family member, they must first determine whether they could create more well-being by donating their money to help unknown strangers who are seriously ill or impoverished… Critics claim that the argument for using our money to help impoverished strangers rather than benefiting ourselves and people we care about only proves one thing—that act utilitarianism is false (Nathanson).” Other objection is that people say that “happiness requires security”, they that how can you maximize happiness and minimize suffrage, if many people lie, say or do other things that later on do not happen and makes other people not have the trust or security to be happy. Going with my example, people will say that turning right just to kill the one person, is morally wrong. They say this, …show more content…
It is also viewed as a simple theory. “In fact, however, the theory is complex because we cannot understand that single principle unless we know (at least) three things: a) what things are good and bad; b) whose good (i.e. which individuals or groups) we should aim to maximize; and c) whether actions, policies, etc. are made right or wrong by their actual consequences (the results that our actions actually produce) or by their foreseeable consequences (the results that we predict will occur based on the evidence that we have) (Nathanson)”, but the believe of Mill to maximize happiness and minimize suffering should work and help out many people how want to make the world a better place and a happier one, too. We should always strive to maximize happiness and minimize pain. We should follow Mill’s believes and do whatever we can do to make everyone happy and not let there be suffering in

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Allowing the government to legally kill the guilty person is wrong, and violates this person’s legal rights. Burns thinks that by killing the person we have alleviate the anger, and have rid the world of that wicked person. We have somehow, gained retribution for the act they have committed, and shown others that we do not allow this act. But, I believe by allowing the courts to legally kill we are promoting the act of killing. We are saying it is OK, to kill someone if they have killed someone you love.…

    • 1468 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Mill used utilitarianism as a basis for ethics and he argued that we already do use utilitarianism as a moral standard. To Mill an action is right if it promotes happiness and it is wrong if it reverse happiness. Kant on the other hand bases his view of ethics on good will rather than the outcomes of happiness. As we read, utilitarianism focuses on outcomes of happiness, here we can concluded that it is based on ends, not on means or intentions. I do not totally agree with this however, a person could intend something bad and wrong but in the end, end up causing great happiness.…

    • 1351 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Allowing what is best for the greatest number of people helping make your moral decisions is a tool that can be very useful, but also can lead to some really tough decisions. Having a complete utilitarian society could possibly spoil individual’s entire life as they are not focusing on their own happiness, but everyone that their moral decision will affect. This might lead them to lead a life making decisions that never fulfill their own happiness but only those around them. I have no argument against the fact that the utilitarian concept sounds very fair and sounds like it would work. But after actually thinking deeper into what a utilitarian society would be like, I conclude utilitarian values only work in doses, and that is why we only have a few examples in contemporary…

    • 1251 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This could essentially question if the action falls under being morally right. Mill 's utilitarian view of morality is agreed upon by many. Although There may be some skepticism about the overall idea; essentially happiness for the vast majority should want to be acquired. Mill does not strictly aim to prove whether something is good or not rather he breaks it down into three parts. One; that the only way to prove something is desirable is that a person may actually desire it, two, essentially individuals tend to desire their own happiness, and three, being happy is good.…

    • 817 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Particularism Vs Pluralism

    • 1444 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Instead of doing this, we pass judgment from the privacy of our own minds and condemn acts that we see as “immoral”. This is due to the idea that man-made moral guidelines on which to live a good life, is embedded in our psyche and we use them to live our everyday lives. However, we can argue that the embodiment of the “moral person” living based on moral guidelines is fundamentally idealistic. No one can be perfectly moral, and I believe that living a life based on multiple, conflicting moral principles does not increase the greater good of a person. Rather, what it does is confuse people about their morality during a particular act.…

    • 1444 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    There are no rules that will work for every circumstance, and to strictly abide by said rules can often lead to less utility than that which would have been gained by making the “morally incorrect” choice. Rule utilitarianism is less about ensuring the most utility for the most numbers and more about convincing yourself that you made the morally right choice simply because you followed all of the rules and therefore could not have done any better. Act utilitarian proves that this is inherently wrong. Not every situation is the same and therefore cannot be treated the same. Instead of following a set of oversimplified rules, act utilitarianism examines a specific situation so that the morally correct choice is the one catered to that circumstance.…

    • 1232 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that was proposed by John Stuart Mill and he claims that all actions become right or wrong depending on their real-world material consequences. That being said, no matter what the consequences are, they would be considered morally right as long as it promotes general happiness. Basically, the action does not matter when dealing with Utilitarianism, only the outcome, whether or not the ends justify the means. There are two kinds of utilitarianism; Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. Act Utilitarianism is that each and every individual action should aim to directly promote good while decreasing harms.…

    • 925 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The assumption is that if we follow a set of rules that give us the best consequences our actions will result in the greater good for everyone around us. Some strengths of utilitarianism include the importance of happiness, consideration of the greater good, and relevance of intention. Meanwhile, Some disadvantages of utilitarianism are that it is not the only thing of value and the end doesn't justify the means. Mill and Kant have opposite views points, Kant thinks people can decide what is moral through reason alone and Mill thinks that through experience people can determine what is good or evil based on pleasure and…

    • 901 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Kant believed that actions are morally correct if these actions come from virtues that motivate these actions. Whereas Aristotle believed that you should do anything in your power to be happy. This means that as long as you are happy that is the highest good, even if you have to do something illegal it doesn’t matter because in the end you are happy and that’s all that matters. Aristotle’s point of view is quite selfish because it only talks about your own happiness. You don’t take other peoples feelings inconsideration when making decisions, you just do what is best for you.…

    • 1570 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Mill's Utilitarianism

    • 725 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Mill’s main argument is that consequences of an action are the sole criterion of its rightness and wrong, but that is not completely true as other things besides consequences matter as well. Mill argues that consequences of an action are what determine whether the action is morally right or wrong. In his views, the object of all the actions is to increase happiness and reduce pain or unhappiness. If the end result of an action is, increase in happiness then the action is morally right, but if as the result of the action happiness is reduced it is morally prohibited. It is only the consequence of an action that matters nothing else is of value.…

    • 725 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays

Related Topics