In philosophy, there are many different ethical theories on which we are believed to reason in everyday decision making. Philosophers such as Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, and Aristotle all developed theories in which they believe we should follow in order to live full ethical and moral lives. Kantianism, utilitarianism, and virtue ethics are all unique theories, but with careful consideration, we can conclude that although virtue ethics generalizes the idea of a well rounded moral individual, There are still many issues that make it just as unreasonable and impractical as the other theories.
Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is a view codified by John Stuart Mill who was a student of Jeremy Bentham who originally introduced the concept. The
…show more content…
This means is that you are not only responsible for what you actually do to maximize happiness, but you are also responsible for the things you didn’t do to maximize happiness and even for times when you didn’t prevent others from minimizing happiness. This means that if you are a studying to be a professional athlete or dancer, this can be viewed as morally bad. During all the time that you use to build on your skill and polish up your craft, you could have been using the time to give back to local nursing homes for example. All the money that you used on training sessions and dance lessons could have all been given to charity. The issue here is that the theory can be too demanding and doesn’t allow people to pursue their passions. Because of negative responsibility, this would imply that most of our time, if not all, would be spent towards maximizing the world’s overall happiness, even though that might mean minimizing yours. Another issue is that some people could simply be wrong about what true happiness is. What if we raised our children off of utilitarianist principles. What if I had 10 children and asked them what they wanted to eat or drink for dinner. They would probably respond with asking for chips, candy, and soda. Although as a health conscious parent, I may not want them to eat the junk food, because there are ten of them and one of me, I would be morally wrong for denying …show more content…
Throughout time and culture, there have been different thoughts on what actions are considered to be virtuous. For instance, in ancient Greece, they valued the virtue of pride, while medieval Christians at the same time, valued the virtue of humility (Garrett). It is culturally insensitive and prejudice to say that one virtue is better than the other. To many, virtues are things that should be universalized for all people at all times. So how then can one decide which approaches in life are virtuous? Another issue with virtue ethics is the difficulty in applying this theory to specific moral dilemmas. Aristotle’s theory tells us be virtuous and act as a virtuous person would. That can be very open ended in practical moral dilemmas. What about a case of abortion, or the use of drugs? Being a well-rounded, virtuous person is not enough instruction for modern day ethic issues. Although this theory is helpful to the society, possessing many virtues does not fully help you choose the moral way of going through
Alysha Hafner Mrs.FS English 03 January 2018 Fahrenheit 451 and Nonfiction articles You can’t always live for happiness/pleasure because it won’t always happen the way you want it to . Although, parents recently tossed books into the streets in front of some schools and burned them. It is causing the parents to be unhappy and ruin books. This matters because they are ruining things because they are unhappy with it.
Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Book ll, is about his idea of how people should live a virtuous life. Throughout this book, he explains that humans learn virtue from instructions and we learn virtue from practice too. Virtue is something that is very important because it is a moral habit that results in keeping our moral values. Aristotle believed that nobody is born with virtue, everyone has to work at it daily. After reading Nicomachean ethics, Book ll, my main conclusion of it is that us as humans are better off being virtuous than simply doing what we feel like doing at any moment in time.
Aristotle describes virtue theory as an ethical theory that emphasizes an individual 's character rather than following a set of rules. Breaking it down even further to specify knowing right from wrong, being able to read an atmosphere by knowing what is right, and it is the midpoint between two extremes. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. display to be a virtue ethicists through his letter oppose to being a deontologist or utilitarian. Laws define a set of rules that the people should follow; however, there are unjust laws that are meant to be challenged.
I chose to review the fifth chapter of “New Ideas From Dead Economists” titled The Stormy Mind of John Stuart Mill. John Stuart Mill was born in 1806 in London to two strict parents who began to educate their son at a very young age. Mill’s father was James Mill, a famous historian and economist, who began to teach his son Greek at the age of three. The book reports that “by eight, the boy had read Plato, Xenophon, and Diogenes” and by twelve “Mill exhausted well-stocked libraries, reading Aristotle and Aristophanes and mastering calculus and geometry” (Buchholz 93). The vast amount of knowledge that Mill gained at a young age no doubt assisted him in becoming such a well-recognized philosopher and economist.
In the reading, "Utilitarianism," the author argues that happiness is the main criteria for morality since people base their actions off of the overall happiness it could promote (pp. 195 and 198) and that while actions differ in the quantity and quality of pleasure, pleasurable actions that require intellect are of the higher pleasures (pp. 196-197). One of the author’s main reasons to support his view is that morality is determined by what increases or decreases the overall amount of utility (pp. 197). Mill denounces the view of utilitarianism as a selfish, unsympathetic ideology by stating that it could only be best used if everyone could promote utility, and he uses the Greatest Happiness Principle, in which he explains that actions
Utilitarianism is the moral theory that the action that people should take it the one that provides the greatest utility. In this paper I intend to argue that utilitarianism is generally untenable because act and rule utilitarianism both have objections that prove they cannot fully provide the sure answer on how to make moral decisions and what will be the ultimate outcome. I intend to do this by defining the argument for act and rule utilitarianism, giving an example, presenting the objections to act and rule utilitarianism and proving that utilitarianism is untenable. Both act and rule utilitarianism attempt to argue that what is right or wrong can be proven by what morally increases the well being of people. Act utilitarianism argues that
Commonly, ethical systems are categorized into two major systems. The deontological approaches or normative ethical position which judges an action based on the adherence of the action to certain rules and the teleological approaches which judges primarily based on the consequences of an action (Hare, 1964). The Utilitarianism is assigned to the teleological approaches, as it does not evaluate an action by itself but by it’s
John Stuart Mill, at the very beginning of chapter 2 entitled “what is utilitarianism”. starts off by explaining to the readers what utility is, Utility is defined as pleasure itself, and the absence of pain. This leads us to another name for utility which is the greatest happiness principle. Mill claims that “actions are right in proportions as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” “By Happiness is intended pleasure and the absence of pain, by happiness, pain and the privation of pleasure”.
The relativist’s objection Aristotle’s writings are the best prototype of virtue ethics. Contemporary virtue theories do not grasp nor represents the Aristotelian theory, because they think that it is impossible to escape the charge of relativism in virtue ethics. According to the relativist approach, ethical goodness is relative to each society depending on its traditions and practices. It is thought that virtue can only be outlined locally with reference to a single locale. Relativists reject the idea that there is a general rule, based on specific virtuous actions, that leads to the good life i.e. they reject that there is a single virtue (or norm of flourishing life) that is able to flourish the life of all human beings.
The idea of virtue ethics was first introduced to the world by Aristotle over 2,300 years ago in 325 BC (Rachels 173). Virtue ethics operate on the belief that people develop good character by looking at the virtues they admire in other people and emulating them. In order to do this, a person must ask themselves what kind of person they want to be and focus on choosing characteristics not specific people to emulate. Unfortunately, virtue ethics were quickly overshadowed by other perspectives on ethical theory as Christianity gained popularity and values changed. As time went on people stopped asking themselves, “What traits make a good person?”
Throughout history many great philosophers have attempted to unravel the origins of virtues by developing moral theories of their own. This document is designed to provide the reader with an overview of some of the more popular theories concerning morals. Three of the most popular moral theories are… Utilitarianism, Kantianism, and Aristotelianism. Though Utilitarianism, Kantianism, and Aristotelianism differ in many ways, they also share similar fundamentals. Utilitarianism is a highly acclaimed theory that is morally based on consequentialism.
Utilitarianism is a teleological ethical theory based on the idea that an action is moral if it causes the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. The theory is concerned with predicted consequences or outcomes of a situation rather than focusing on what is done to get to the outcome. There are many forms of utilitarianism, having been introduced by Jeremy Bentham (act utilitarianism), and later being updated by scholars such as J.S. Mill (rule utilitarianism) and Peter Singer (preference utilitarianism). When referring to issues of business ethics, utilitarianism can allow companies to decide what to do in a given situation based on a simple calculation. Many people would agree that this idea of promoting goodness
Virtue ethics is an expansive theory inspired by the famous Greek philosopher Aristotle. In contrast to deontology and consequentialism, virtue ethics emphasizes the moral character (ideal traits) of a person. Aristotle believed that nature produced humans with the desire to be virtuous, just how seeds are built with the drive to become trees. This concept can be related to the term eudaimonia, which translates to the flourishing of a human being; a happy and well-lived life.
Therefore, the consequence ultimately can outweigh the feeling of happiness. Also, what may be considered good to the individual may not be considered good for other people. If it is not good to other people, then everything that makes an individual happy is not a good thing to everyone.
Plato claimed that virtue is a type of knowledge since qualities are only beneficial when they are accompanied by knowledge. Virtue is always beneficial, thus, it must be a form of knowledge. If virtue is knowledge, vice – being the opposite of virtue – must be the lack of knowledge. As with every ethical system, Aristotle’s theory is subject to some criticism.