Criticism: The Normative Morality Of Utilitarianism

849 Words4 Pages
Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory. This identifies it within a framework of regarding the morality of an action being guided by the consequences it produces. The normative morality of utilitarianism places its locus of the rightfulness of an action being that which produces the most happiness and the least of pain. The action of wrongfulness is that which is adverse, produces a higher result of pain and less of happiness. This is the standard central foundation of this theory. The mentioned normative theory of ethics is as coined by Jeremy Bentham, in his founding of utilitarianism. However, George Mill who can be said to be a versed advocate for utilitarianism, defends the theory from common criticisms such as “What utilitarianism…show more content…
A vital concept in utilitarianism plays a vital impact in expressing the notion of pleasure. It allows explanation to the perspective of the theory that consequences are to be considered according to the value of whether they are of quality or quantity. Mill points to these views being in correspondence with the natural desires or pleasures of the human being. Substantiation to this is from the view that the desires of people are based on their ability (of that which is desired) to create, maintain, or increase the state of pleasure. Mill address that the morality of utilitarianism does not lie within the realms of merely individual satisfaction. On the contrary, it puts high morality on that action which reaps greater utility (usefulness) for the surrounding community or world at large, within the…show more content…
One of the objections which I consider to be of strength is one regarding the over flexibility of the sanction principle. The in-built nature of utilitarianism as a theory, fails to impose plausible corrective consequences to those actions which do not comply with the stipulated rules of the moral theory. Though the theory claims to not promote actions of self benefit, it fails to blatantly rebuke actions contravening general morality, by offering acceptance to such given that the justification provided corresponds with the guidelines of the theory. This objection is of collorally effect to a line of criticisms. Bernard Williams presents a reasonable flaw of the theory not being able to uphold justice and fairness. The primary basis for this is because it shows little importance to the rights of an individual in pursuit of what is supposedly good for the community. In his point he presents a case called ‘The Fat Man in the Cave’. He poses a question of whether it would be moral to blow the fat man using dynamite out of the cave hole just to create way for the rest of the people in the cave. The negative answer to this scenario proves the loophole of utilitarianism. (Bernard
Open Document