Utilitarian Vs Mill

Superior Essays
Utilitarians argue that the most important principle is the “greatest happiness principle”, or utility. It states that “actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness” or “wrong as they intend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Mill 10). For the utilitarian, the action that helps them gain feelings of happiness are right, and those that take away from it are considered to be wrong or hurtful. Happiness, for Mill and other utilitarians is the presence of intended pleasure and the absence of anything that causes pain. An individual would be considered happy if they are doing something that they enjoy, such as taking a walk or creating artwork. The action should also help generate overall happiness for a large group of …show more content…
First, the individual would have to define what right moral judgement is, in the eyes of utilitarians. For utilitarians, the right action, as stated, would be the one that brings the most pleasure to the individual. In this example, that would be killing the hostage that has caused the abductor mass turmoil in their life. If the utilitarian were to amend their position, it would essentially mean going against what their principles revolve around, which is seeking pleasure and diminishing pain for anybody. There is also the issue of moral flexibility, which “refers to the idea that people are motivated to do the right thing, but a given moral principle can give rise to very different moral judgement and decisions across contexts.” (“Judgement and Decision Making” 6). The utilitarians are a prime example of a group who has moral flexibility in their decisions. For them, the right thing to have done in that situation was to carry out the action that produces the most happiness for the group overall. The group happiness would have more value to the utilitarian than the individual pain that will be caused in the murder of one. For anyone who is not a utilitarian, the right action would have been letting all the hostages go and removing the threat, which would be the abductor. That would be considered the right moral judgement for anyone who values the life of …show more content…
The reason why it is better is because the Kantian approach seems more practical for real world situations than the utilitarian does. It forces the person to think and be conscious of the intentions and the actions that one carries out. If one thinks of it as becoming a universal law that they cannot be exempt from, then they are less likely to commit an action that is considered morally wrong. The utilitarian encourages the individual to seek aggregate happiness for themselves and the group, and to ensure that it happens through any way possible. This opens the possibility to using harmful acts, such as murder, cheating and lying to ensure that group happiness is existent in a large amount. If that were to occur, then people would be prone to deceiving one another and not treating each other as equals. Instead, they would be treating each other as stepping stones to their ultimate goal, without regarding their feelings or the consequences that may arise. Pleasure and happiness can come from more appropriate means, such as from decisions that have been thought over and carried out. The utilitarian approach would create more chaos in the world and skew moral judgement, due to its moral flexibility. Kantians are more concrete in their moral judgement, which make them better to follow. It is more successful in making the right moral

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Human Value and the Problem of Unhappiness in Rule Utilitarianism Rule utilitarianism emphasises general rather than specific situations so that rules can be applied to ensure the most happiness, and by doing so fails in the same respect as act utilitarianism to address the human worth consequently enabling situations that are less utilitarian than act utilitarianism. Rule utilitarianism creates rules that would lead to the general overall happiness of individuals and an act is considered moral when it conforms to those rules. This would mean that an act in accordance to rule utilitarianism could be moral, even if the act does not bring about overall happiness, but just because it conformed to a rule that, if the circumstances were different,…

    • 1164 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    If the ultimate goal is to maximize one’s well-being, then it would seem that acting unjustly would be reasonable. Contrastingly, if an action improves another’s well-being, if it is morally good, then it would be considered just. It is debatable whether or not one can commit an act of justice, and, in doing so, maximize one’s own happiness. Many would claim that just acts are solely for the sake of others and always at the expense of one’s own self-interest. However, I would argue that committing just acts can inadvertently lead to an increase in happiness for some people.…

    • 1130 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior 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
  • Improved Essays

    Voice 1: Oh Godwin, you are a beautiful bastard. The point you are making could easily be used against you. People can be just as bad as determining what would be most pleasurable to the most amount of people. Especially the selfish ones… It would be easier to have a set of rules that say “do this.” Voice 2: That may be the case; however, I would argue that easier isn’t always better, especially in these cases. I would much rather people ponder the consequence of their actions, rather than if they have good intentions.…

    • 1036 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Rather, he values the importance of success, which ultimately leads to goodness. If a leader were to rely solely on his morals, his mind would be clouded with unreasonable and unattainable duties. Learning to set morality to the side allows for the liberation of mind and action while ridding one’s thought of virtuous restrictions. When deception acts as a mediator between virtuous behavior and rational thought, one learns that the only “good” that matters is a derived form of…

    • 1948 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Is it the golden rule of treating others the way you would want to be treated? Acting on impulse because it feels good? Or doing your duty because it is your “job” to do so? One cannot determine what is "right" and what is "wrong"; it must be taught or shown to us by means of common sense and unified agreement. At the same time, influence of the self- its own interests, wants and needs- play a bigger role in what creates ones ' moral standpoint.…

    • 1398 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    I believe that rule utilitarianism is better than kantianism because it is reasonable to assume consequences and humans are too complex to strictly follow the categorical imperative. Although utilitarianism could use some work, the basic principles of the theory are much more practical to apply to the real world compared to kantianism. Utilitarianism and kantianism are both normative moral theories as they are methods of decision-making rules that apply principles for the right and wrong of actions. Using each of these methods, I will explain each theory rational in deciding what action Jim should take in this situation. For a utilitarian, the morally right act for Jim to do would be to kill the one person to save himself and the others.…

    • 974 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He argues that the amount of suffering and happiness is what indicates the morality of an action and thus strongly believes that end results of an action are what help decide a moral action. He claims that an act is good or right insofar as it brings the greatest amount of happiness to the greatest amount of people. By happiness he means pleasure and joy and the lack of pain or suffering. From his point of view, the happiness derived from an action doesn 't even have to be that person 's own. Rather, as long as it makes more people happy than unhappy, it is morally right.…

    • 1751 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    However, your morals and virtues are what lead you to make that decision and ultimately the consequences that came with the decision not only affected you but everyone around you. The next reason why I believe virtue ethics to be more consequentialist than non-consequentialist is because the characteristics between a person who has virtue ethics has ethical egoism. According to Vaughn (P. 70) “the morally right action is the one that produces the most favorable balance of good over for oneself. The decision that somebody makes when dealing with different circumstances leads them to make decisions that will make them feel and look good in front of people. Someone with the mentality of an ethical egotist will think first about the consequences about the decision that they are about to make.…

    • 1690 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Why Should We Be Moral?

    • 1555 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Next, utilitarianism is another ethical concept that will be examining. Utilitarianism, one of the well known and influential theory, defined as the best action leads to the greatest happiness for the greatest numbers. There are two categories in Utilitarianism, an Act-Utilitarianism and Rule-Utilitarianism. Act-Utilitarianism is the effects of individual actions while Rule-Utilitarianism only focus on the types of actions. The purpose of utilitarians is to make a better life by enlarging the amount of good pleasure and happiness and also reducing the amount of bad pain and unhappiness.…

    • 1555 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays