If the choice causes them to be worse off, it is still better than not existing at all. Lastly, even if the action is considered morally wrong and harms the future person, it is still morally better to choose this action as opposed to denying this future person the right to live. The choice you are worried about will not affect the existence of these future people, but rather, it will only benefit or damage them but not violate them existing. (Serada, class notes). As Parfit states, “Since these two choices will be worse for no one, we need to explain why we have a moral reason not to make these choices.
As a college student, I am always keeping myself updated with different new university policies because many policies are impacting my college life. Although many policies are impacting me in school, college tuition is the most important to me. The increase of college tuition at U.C and CSU will cause many problems for students. The school administration thinks that is the time to increase student tuition, but students will not benefit from the increase. Therefore, my paper will offer a utilitarian evaluation of the recent CSU and UC increase in tuition, it will show that said policy is unethical from a business and social standpoint.
Today I learned a lot from the presentations in class from some philosophers theories and my classmate's opinions on these theories. Utilitarianism was one of my favorites and this theory seemed to care for people the most and how they are affected by a situation. I favored this idea because it is very close to my very own personality because before I take a serious action I put a lot of thought into consideration before proposing a decision. I am very considerate of others feeling and I think about how will my actions make this person feel or will it affect others so I guess that is why I took the concept of utilitarianism very personal and found this very interesting.
The government is watching you; there is nothing you can do that they will not notice. This is the reality in 1984 by George Orwell. Winston lives in Oceania in 1984 and works for the government; however, he begins to realize that everything the government has taught him is against all moral laws. Winston joins a secret group of rebels called The Brotherhood, the adversary of the Party, where he meets his love, Julia. Winston and Julia’s love is a crime, and so is belonging to The Brotherhood.
“To wing your course along the middle air; if low the surges wet your flagging plumes; if high, the sun the melting wax consumes”. This is the advice that Daedalus, the inventor from a renowned Greek myth, gave to his son Icarus when he was about to escape from Crete by means of wings that his father made. In order to control his wings, Icarus had to keep a constant distance between the sun and his wings. However, he eventually disregarded his father’s warning and filled with the exhilaration of flying. With the greed to fly as high as he could, he flew too high and too close to the sun.
In discussion of the issue of utilitarianism, a controversial issue has been that utilitarianism is an unfair theory that subject’s minority to pain at the cost of majority’s happiness. This topic is relevant in today’s discussions as it surrounds the issue of smartphones that we all use so as to communicate with our loved ones and friends on social media and follow trends such as selfies and hashtags. However, do we know the story behind the creation of these smartphones? Do we buy them knowing that they are powered by child labor mines in Africa? These children work in gruesome conditions, with extreme heat or rain for a dollar per day so as to mine cobalt which is later sold to cellphone battery manufacturers in China and South Korea.
Brave new world - Essay I look at this from a utilitarian perspective were the moral thing is to do the most good for the most amount of people. The individual, while important in any sense, is only relevant in terms of the community as a whole. It is very similar to the question of individual versus collective happiness. The happiness of the most amount of people is better than letting the individual decide for oneself.
The problem with Utilitarianism is that it very easily justifies the oppression and abuse of minorities as long as the majority of people is better off because of it. Why would it be wrong to keep 10% of the population as slaves if 90% of the population never have to do hard or unpleasant work as a result? Why would it be wrong to simply kill people who aren't well liked by the majority if they all feel better as a result? The issue with a philosophy that bases whether something is good or evil purely on whether the majority or the minority are benefiting is simply a nightmare scenario for anyone who's part of a minority that is said to cause unhappiness for the majority. Like, the Empire in Star Wars is Utilitarian.
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
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?
For instance, let’s say the mother goes through the nine months of being pregnant with the child and has the child. Of course, if the mother does not want the child for any reasons a woman would not want a child, it is understandable that the pregnancy may not completely be enjoyable for the mother due the trials it takes on to the human body. There is still a way that more happiness can come from the mother having the child. If the mother was to give up the child for adoption after having the baby, the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number could occur, which is the entire goal of the Utilitarian thought process. So, the mother gives up the child for adoption and then a couple who possibly could not have a child could become parents.
The Republican Theory Thus far we have been uncovering different views and perspectives of the universe within the sociological studies. These have included the Utilitarian Theory and the Liberal Theory of Justice. Now our readings have taken us beyond these theories, and has introduced us to an entire new principle, The Republican Theory. Although the theory itself has the same name as a political party within the United States, it should not be confused with the same beliefs of those in the Republican party.
As per the reading suggested by the instructor about the philosophical idea of Consequentialism (Utilitarianism) given by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill and the other concept which is given by Immanuel Kant in the critics of Utilitarianism theory which is called Deontological Ethics. The reading given made understand about all these two concept and their possible application in the policy or law making like the universal law. Utilitarianism:- this is the concept used by Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and the John Stuart Mill (1806-1873). The core idea of this theory is the results comes from the action taken by the group of people or the individual. According to theory the outcomes will be judged weather the action was morally right or wrong.
Singer's theory of preference utilitarianism rests on the idea that everyone's preferences should be looked at equally. This means that all living and sentient beings have interests, can feel pain and pleasure. Preferences, in this case, does not mean happiness necessarily. Looking at happiness specifically, is another type of utilitarianism that will be discussed further in the later part of this essay. Singer includes people with severe disabilities, animals, intelligent aliens, and infants to the list of beings that need to be considered.
Utilitarianism is a moral philosophy that is credited to being created by Jeremey Bentham. Bentham believed that all humans make choices based on two feelings, pain and pleasure. Because of this, Bentham believed that motives are not good or bad in nature but instead on what feeling a human might feel more.
