Utilitarianism: The Moral Theory By John Stuart Mill

Improved Essays
Everyone has a set of morality and standards they will abide by, telling them right from wrong. Moral theory is an attempt to answer moral questions about our actions and what we ought to do. According to John Rawls, “Moral theory is the study of substantive moral conceptions, that is, the study of how the basic notions of the right, the good, and the moral worth may be arranged to form different moral structures (Rawls, pg. 1).” Utilitarianism is a modern theory introduced to us by John Stuart Mill. Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that results in the best action to promote and maximize utility. The idea behind this theory is to maximize pleasure while minimizing pain. However, utilitarianism is not a feasible moral theory and it cannot …show more content…
This process helps us understand the meaning behind how an individual would draw a conclusion to what is wrong and right or what makes something good or not. The resources from the modules define the practical aim as a process, based on reliable information, that will lead them to make a moral verdict. While the theoretical aim is understanding the underlying feature of a moral question that makes them morally right or wrong. The moral theory consists of moral principles that pertain conditions with various criteria and guides for action to determine whether an action is right or wrong- to systematize morality. Criteria such as consistency, applicability, intuitive appeal, …show more content…
As defined above, utilitarianism is an ethical theory that results in the best action to promote and maximize utility. We do not see that justice was mention or included in the definition. Justice is a virtue that society depends on for the judgment of the goods and evils in the world. According to Rawls, “… the principle of utility is incompatible with the conception of social cooperation among equals for mutual advantage (Rawls, pg. 179).” Utilitarianism is impersonal and does not take into account the individual’s rights and belief as seen in the example. John Rawls discusses the idea of distributive justice, where we distribute benefits and burdens of our economic system (Vojko, 2017). Rawls has two principles of Justice: equal basic liberties for all and economic inequalities arranged for an advantage of all including for the worst off. Dealing with political liberties, Rawls answers with “equal basic liberties for all (Vojko,

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    It involves assessing what the people perceive to be moral and taking actions which will produce insignificant consequences on the people other than the individual performing the act. REGARDING EITHER THEORIST 6. As provided by Kant on his ethical theory, the standard of living an ethical life entails carrying out the logical reasoning behind the actions which are perceived to be moral. Kant argued that it is not a matter of following what the norm have stated to be moral but rather questioning the reason behind taking certain actions (Ross 37). Mill on the other hand in his utilitarian ethical theory based standards of living an ethical life on the ability of one to achieve maximum happiness from the…

    • 1177 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    And evaluate objectivism, check the validity of this ethical theory and review if it is a competence moral principle to live by. . But before begin we must note what are some of the must agree upon traits of an ethical principle. So we may evaluate each ethical principle being presented in this essay. The first is Prescriptivity; this trait is the ability to guide actions, nature of morality, this trait is used to assign appraise and blame, these are used to provide feelings contentment and guilt.…

    • 1691 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Whether we feel against or not we know the morally right thing and it’s our duty to care out our action. Apart from what is in the sense of good will nothing else is considered to be good. He says that when guided to do what’s good in by morality there is no seeking for the reward. The simple reward is doing the right thing. When based off of feelings as for a reward for doing the right thing then it is not morality.…

    • 881 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Introduction According to Immanuel Kant, any action a moral agent commits out of sympathy or a subjective desire has no moral value, in turn, any action a moral agent commits out of duty or obedience has a moral value. Even when a subjective desire motivates an action to achieve a positive outcome, it is still considered morally worthless. This paper will discuss the motivations and incentives behind actions committed by moral agents. It will also cover the differences between a subjectively or objectively motivated action and how moral value is assigned to these actions. Sympathy, Subjective Desire and Actions Actions are motivated and preformed with incentive, these are based on objective and subjective grounds; the only true moral incentive…

    • 1477 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    According to Russ Shafer-landau: “ethical egoism is a moral theory.it tell us about what we are morally required and forbidden to do. Specifically, it say that there is one ultimate moral duty-to improve your own well- being as best you can. Whenever you fail to achieve this goal, you are behaving immorally”. (106, par2). This statement enclosed the justification and the base of the ethical egoism theory, therefore the pursuit of the well- being is the main purpose.…

    • 761 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Ultimately, a Kantian ethical framework does not emphasize the outcome that is achieved by an action, but instead, determines the moral worth of an action based on the motive behind it. In terms of moral reasoning, Kant calls us to focus our attention on human rationale and a…

    • 905 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    When faced with a moral dilemma, these theories may agree or conflict with one another. To fully understand how normative principles, justify morality, they must be broken down. We will begin with consequentialism, which is a future-oriented family of theories. Consequentialism states that actions are morally right just because…

    • 1103 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Ethics analyses the moral of human behaviours, the policies relates, laws abide and social structures. People that study ethics attempt to justify their moral judgments by developing ethical principles of theories that attempt to capture our moral ways about what is wrong and what is right. There are two theoretical approaches that are common in ethics are Utilitarianism (consequentialism) and Kantianism…

    • 1465 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Kant’s ethics is more concerned with the motivation (reasoning for doing it) of an agents actions and not the goodness of the consequences of those actions therefore making Kantian ethics a deontological ethical theory meaning its an ethical position that judged the morality of an actions based on duty, obligation, or rule. A Kantian ethicist would first consider what actions are “right” actions and proceed from there. In regards to Constitutive luck, Kant would say that constitutive luck doesn’t exist for rational agents because if people are rational then moral action and knowledge is available to everyone according to Grounding. (Everyone has the opportunity to be good). But, if the scenario above agent 2 still hit the kid since their action had good intent and in accordance with duty (because good intention=good will=accordance to duty) then what agent 2 did wasn’t morally wrong.…

    • 1147 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Separateness Of Persons

    • 788 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Rawls and Nozick argue that utilitarianism does not consider that beings are individuals in their own right and “does not take seriously the distinction between persons”. Utilitarianism focuses solely on achieving maximal total utility. In order to do this, it sacrifices an even distribution of utility and ‘sanctions injustice’. It directs us to act unjustly to a few in order to achieve happiness on a larger scale- failing to respect individuals needs and rights. According to Nozick this notion is flawed as “to use a person [for another’s benefit] does not sufficiently respect and take account of the fact that he is a separate person, that his is the only life he has.…

    • 788 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays