I will conclude by siding with consequentialism for various reasons that I will try my best to explain. Consequentialism The moral theory of consequentialism centers its view about morality as the production of all the kinds of consequences that are naturally good. In this theory according to Kalajtzidis (2013), the reference of consequences of a deed means the overall outcome of an action, the action itself being inclusive. Shafer-Landau (2012) cites that the people who propose and support consequentialism concur with the effect that morality is wholly concerned with issues to do with the creation of as much freedom in the world as can be naturally and humanly possible (Kalajtzidis, 2013). Moreover, supporters of this ethical approach acknowledge that it is the sole moral activity of human beings to spread happiness and provide relief to the individuals who are going through hard times and suffering (Shafer-Landau, 2012).
After he realizes that he could now be considered a murderer, he makes a plan to get a captain to go investigate the wreck in order to save the men's lives. Even though the men he would be saving are murderers and robbers, he doesn’t want to be responsible for their deaths, and tries to correct what he has done wrong. This is the first major step in Huck's moral maturation. At that point, he establishes a set of standards that
Intrinsically, this theory does not perceive other purposes or obligations to deliver more resource or salary to people that need most of resources and to the people that deserve most of resources. Utilitarianist especially pay attention for doing best things that create happines in whole society. However, utilitarianism largely prefer a specific distributive action. For example, they give priority to decrease wealth of rich people for delivering it to the poor people - distribution of goods or resource. Furthermore, in companies, utilitariansts can prefer to take away the salary of board of directors for expanding salary of permanent workers of the company.
One might argue that Huck's conscience isn't completely tainted because he is friends with Jim, a slave. However, throughout the beginning of the story, Hucks poor conscience and lack of judgement is displayed, while often lying to anyone he meets, even to his own family. When Huck is faced with a difficult decision, he prefers not to be dishonest, "Please take it," says I, "and don't ask me nothing—then I won't have to tell no lies" (19). Huck shows a glimpse of hope for the future and redemption. He states he prefers not to lie, proving there is a chance he will listen to that side.
(Mill, utilitarianism, p.697) To put this into simpler terms, Mill is essentially saying events or experiences are desirable only when it is a source for pleasure, so actions are good when they lead to higher levels of general happiness and they are deemed as bad when it lowers your general level of happiness. However, it is important to note utilitarianism doesn’t say it is morally right for everyone to purse what make them alone happy but instead morality is dictated by what increases the total amount of utility in the world. Pursuing your own happiness at the expense of the majority of social happiness would be viewed as wrong by utilitarian’s. Mill then proceeded to say that morality requires impartial consideration of the interest of everyone involved, its not just about your own happiness. Utilitarian suggest that we make our moral decisions from the position of a benevolent, disinterested spectator.
If I held a utilitarianism belief I would be looking at maximizing happiness (Sandel, 2009). Jeremy Bentham states we are governed by our feelings of pleasure and pain. The utilitarian approach uses this for the basis of maximizing the pleasure of the community as a whole. Sometimes individual rights can be sacrificed to save the happiness in the majority of the community. According to the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, the utilitarian view would seek to maximize the overall good.
Ethics also called moral philosophy, “is the discipline concerned with what is morally good and bad, right and wrong. The term is also applied to any system or theory of moral values or principles”.1 For Socrates “Ethics are the norms by which acceptable and unacceptable behavior are measured”.2 He believed that individuals develop ethics through maturity, wisdom and love. Ethics have developed as people have reflected on the intentions and consequences of their actions. Immanuel Kant however argued that “moral requirements are based on a standard of rationality he called the Categorical Imperative”.3 Kant’s theory can be seen as an example of the deontological moral theory. According to this theory, the rightness or wrongness of actions does
John Stuart Mill points out the inherent value of individuality, since individuality is by definition the thriving of the human person through the higher pleasures. He argues that a safe society ought to attempt to promote individuality as it is the pre- requisite for creativity and diversity. Therefore Mill concludes that actions themselves don’t matter, rather the person behind the action and the action together are valuable. However on the limits to the authority of
Utilitarianism judges consequences by a “greatest happiness for the greatest number” standard (Bentham,1776). That is, the right act or policy maximises the total utility or welfare of the majority of all the affected parties. Bentham famously held that humans were ruled by two ultimate masters – pleasure and pain. We seek pleasure and the avoidance of pain, they “… govern us in all we do, in all we say, in all we think…” (Bentham, 1780). Bentham believed that the good consequences of an action must be assessed in terms of pleasure where the more it produces the more the action will be good, but if the action will not give pleasure or the maximum of pleasure possible, it will be deemed
It refers to the goodness of oneself in the long run. Each of the ethical theories discusses about the importance of self-interest. Utilitarian approach considers one’s own good as well as the good of others. Duty ethicist stresses duties to us and for own well-being. Ethicists of rights emphasize our rights to pursue our own good.