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 mind just is behavior. Behavior is physical thus is the mind is physical. Objections To Identity Theory There are a few objections when it comes to the identity thoery. The Leibniz's Law of Identity says that if two objects are identical, then they have all of the same properties.
Act Utilitarianism, being a hedonistic view, promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest good, however Rule Utilitarianism is based on rules of thumb, which may contradict themselves. For example, Rule Utilitarianism makes progress in the sense of being moral saints. This is based on how it takes “into account the effects of the rule or practice itself” (pg. 137). Those whose needs have been met who want to give a portion of their income to the less fortunate promote the greater good.
Consequentialists are a group of philosophers who asses whether an act is right or wrong based on the consequences of the action. There are different types of consequentialism including: ethical egoism, act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism. These three branches of consequentialism will be discussed later in this paper. A supererogatory act is something that is good but is not obligatory; these acts involve rendering aid to others that go above moral requirement. Consequentialists claim that there are no supererogatory acts; an act either produces the most pleasure and is therefore morally good, or it brings about pain and is morally bad.
Brogan’s work John Locke and Utilitarianism, Brogan interprets Locke’s Essay with the endeavor of elucidating on Locke’s liberal ideals on what should be considered the standard of morality. “The standard or criterion of morality (or “virtue”) is the good (interpreted as the happiness) of all” (Brogan, pg. 80). Locke has an egoistic notion of morality, in which the self-interest of others is what constitutes morality for him--and ultimately the greatest good, which extends to public happiness. “Locke is an empiricist in holding that the materials of knowing and choosing come from external senses or from the internal perceptions of the operations of the mind (within which are included pleasure and pain)” (Brogan, pg. 93).
Consequentialism is a theory that supports maximum good consequences. It states that an individual should choose only those actions that maximize good consequences, as the greater good consequences an act produces the better is that act; not only on individual level but society level as well. Non-consequentialism on the other hand, is a theory opposite to consequentialism and is supported by a German philosopher Immanuel Kant who stated that an individual should respect the consequences of an action, no matter they are bad, and should act with good will and intention. He stated that an action is tolerable only if its maxim can be applied to all, and you want that to happen. Decision making is the most basic and important step in running an organization and every decision involves an opportunity cost.
I will begin with utilitarianism. The fundamental principles of Utilitarianism assign value to actions based on the ‘greater good’ theory (fundamentally, greatest good for the greatest number) and the actions consequences. It is teleological and holds that the moral action is the one that maximizes utility. Without
On the other hand, Kantianism claims that an action is moral if it’s done under the sense of duty (Vlach, n.d.). Virtue ethics looks at the character rather than the duties of act itself and its consequences (Sansbury, Barry and Shaw, 2013). Some other theories covered are: Ethics of Capitalism, Ethics of Consumption, Ethics and Globalization and Ethics at workplace. Although they are all related to the individual and business ethics, I am going
Utilitarianism is a term in which John Rawls rejects on two main grounds. Utilitarianism ignores the distinctness of persons and defines the right in terms of the good, according to Rawls. Rawls aims to create a theory of justice (thought experiment in this sense) that is superior to Utilitarianism and offers an intuitive dynamic. Rawls’ theory of justice as a result, can best be described as an attempt to apply in his terms a consistent analogy on the distinctness of persons and prioritising the right over the good . Rawls himself talks about justice as free and equal persons cooperating and agreeing to certain terms in fair conditions, hence the term “justice as fairness” .
Rule utilitarianism is a belief in which, an action is morally right, as long as it justified in accordance to a particular law. Utilitarianism is less complicated to understand (compared to other moral theories) because it consists of “doing whatever produces the best consequences” (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Virtue Ethics). Mill viewed the greatest happiness principle as the cornerstone of morals, he