Exactly, you would want your child to be saved as well. That 's one of the major flaws I see in utilitarianism. The rule of utilitarianism is that the decision that brings the most happiness should be made. I 'm not saying the disabled child wouldn 't bring any happiness, I 'm saying in this case the neighbor 's four kids would bring more happiness to society rather than the disabled one. The act of utilitarianism is a cruel system, but if one wants to incorporate into society then they should incorporate it completely rather than
In today’s society, abortion is a controversial topic. Many people dispute if it is moral to eliminate the potential of the unborn fetus or if it is fair to force the parent to keep and raise the baby if the parent isn’t ready. In Sallie Tisdale’s We Do Abortions Here: A Nurse’s Story, the author uses imagery and internal conflict to recreate her experiences as a nurse employed at an abortion hospital. She does this to make her audience understand her and the people who work in abortion hospitals’ perspective.
The American Author, Ursula K Le Guin has written many novels and short stories in the past. She is most famous for her science-fiction novels and works. “The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas” is a short story based in the utopia city of Omelas. Le Guin tries to convey the idea of being able to live in a utopia only at the sacrifice of a young child’s innocence. Through the short story, Le Guin gives the reader the question: would you be able to live in a utopia knowing that there is a young child suffering for your happiness? Le Guin tells the reader that one should not be able to live in a perfect utopia (Omelas) knowing that the citizens are having to abuse a young child and rip him of his innocence just for the sake of their own happiness.
In the story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”, The narrator defined Omelas as a Utopian city, where everyone in the city is filled with endless joy. The society that they have can be described as the perfect world. While everyone maintains a pleased life, there is a child that is mistreated by the town all to keep everyone happy with their lives. The child has to be locked up in a dark basement, where the child is feed every little and abused by the people in the city. If the child was not locked up and neglected the city could be in danger of losing that happiness, also in fear of the city being destroyed. Many people of the city chose to leave the city, because they didn't believe in the act of hurting that child. “The trouble is that we have a bad habit, encouraged by pedants and sophisticates, of considering happiness as something rather stupid. Only pain is intellectual, only evil interesting. This is the treason of the artist; a refusal to admit the banality of evil and the terrible boredom of pain.” (Guin pg 444) This quote is meant for the audience understand what the narrator is truly saying, which she is trying to compare the Omelas society as to the society today.
Ursula Le Guin defines Omelas as a utopia where the citizens’ lives are never wretched. Le Guin captures her readers’ attention by describing the city’s beauty with the colorful scenery, events featuring games and horse riding, and the everlasting happiness. She does a great job of leading her readers into thinking this could be the perfect society, but leaves us with the question of satisfaction. According to Le Guin, “happiness is based on a just discrimination of what is necessary, what is neither necessary nor destructive, and what is destructive” (p. 2). This quote means that there must be a balance for the society to succeed. The basic needs in life are considered as water, food, and reproduction, and the simple wants are “central heating, subway trains, washing machines, and all kinds of marvelous devices” (p.2). The destruction to society could be one’s remorse for the child’s suffering. If one shows sympathy for the child and it is released from the basement, the city’s beauty and happiness will vanish. The child could represent selfless because its sacrifice is for the prosperity of Omelas. Le Guin explains that the society is a bargain between happiness and
An ethical dilemma today in society is that of abortion, which one would define as a deliberate end to a pregnancy. Various arguments exist questioning if an abortion is morally justifiable. Some say the state should decide on the legality of an abortion, some politicians say the federal government should decide, and many believe it should be up to the women since it pertains to their body. In this paper, I will analyze what a utilitarian’s perspective on abortion would be.
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.
Girl, Interrupted is a film that portrays many different illnesses, but specifically the experiences of Susanna, the main character, who is a patient at a psychiatric hospital. The multipath model contains the different dimensions portrayed in the film: biological, psychological, social, and sociocultural. Susanna is diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) and some of the dimensions are applied to this disorder in the film. There is really no biological dimension shown in the film with any of the characters. There might be some genetic factors between Susanna and her parents with BPD, but it is not indicated so. In Susanna’s case, the psychological dimension indicates that she, along with others with BPD, experience feelings of
When discussing both act and rule utilitarianism, it is important to understand that both of them agree in terms of the overall consequence of an action, because they emphasize on creating the most beneficial pleasure and happiness in the outcome of an act. Despite this fact, they both have different principles and rules that make them different from each other. Act utilitarianism concentrates on the acts of individuals. Meaning that if a person commits an action, he/she must at least have a positive utility. The founders of utilitarianism define positive utility as happiness and pleasure and consider it to be a driving force of all positive and morally right acts. According to Jeremy Bentham, and John Mill Stuart happiness to them comes from
The divine command theory, utilitarianism, Kant’s duty defined morality, natural law theory, and Aristotle’s virtue ethics are the five types of ethical theories. The divine command theory states that what is morally right and wrong will be decided by God. Utilitarianism states that “Action “A” is morally right if and only if it produces the greatest amount of overall happiness. Kant’s duty defined morality states that what is important is acting for the sake of producing good consequences, no matter what the act is. Natural law theory states that people should focus on the good and avoid any evil. The last theory is Aristotle’s virtue ethics which states that we should move from the concern towards good action and to focus on the concern with good character. This paper argues that Aristotle’s virtue ethics is better than the other ethical theories.
Ethical subjectivism, also known as moral subjectivism, is a philosophical theory. This approach supports euthanasia in the sense of allowing the truth and rights of an individual to remain at a different level. Ethical subjectivism is a theory that suggests that moral truths are determined at an individual level, therefore making it your reality. Euthanasia is the painless killing of an aggressively tormented dying patient. I believe that euthanasia must be legal, and I agree with the whole logic and the procedure. I think that people should ultimately be relieved of torment because it goes against the virtues of being alive, it is your human right, it 'll benefit your loved ones not to witness you suffer any longer, and it should be considered treatment.
Being able to embrace your talents. The ability to make decisions without external influence and having no discrimination between different ethnicity. All of this are results of freedom. Many dystopian works of fiction also describe the outcome of societies in which individuals who challenged the cruel traditions showed bravery and made changes to the society. Likewise, the American founding fathers believed that freedom would lead to a better future for America so they challenged the colonists to make positive changes. In order to attain freedom, one must take action and make changes in the present. Freedom can only occur by standing up to the opposition and sacrificing one’s life.
Wiesel 's philosophy on oppression is that if we do not speak, that will not help the oppressed. He states that in the following; "neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented"(Wiesel, Night). In the speeches he has done, he explains that being silent is a never a good idea and will only help the oppressor. He also speaks on how he himself after being liberated the Jews did not want to fight and did not feel guilty about it, and for us never to do that. Also, Wiesel talks about if we do not help that we will hear their pain; "now we feel their pain, their agony?" (Wiesel, Perils). The consequences of not doing anything to help people from suffering becomes a big tragedy, just like the
Suppose a conductor is driving his train and the breaks are defect. The rails lead directly into a cluster of five people who would all die if the train will go this direction. However, the conductor can change onto another track where only one person is standing hence only one person would die. How should the conductor react (Hare, 1964)? Is it possible to condense the problem to a rather simple maximization problem in example that the action is taken, which would kill the least people? Utilitarianisms would answer the question in the affirmative and change the track so only one person has to suffer. However, we have to question if the Utilitarianism is applicable to such ethical questions (Smart & Williams, 1973). This essay will outline several strength and weaknesses of the Utilitarianism devised by Jeremy Bentham. Firstly, the Utilitarianism will be outlined, secondly some strength and weaknesses are explained by employing examples, and thirdly several solution approaches for dilemmas Bentham’s Utilitarianism is facing will be sketched.