Essay The First – Goodness has nothing to do with it

Utilitarianism is the theory of taking the proper course of action that maximizes utility, resulting in maximum happiness and a reduction in suffering. This article presents an ethical dilemma raising the question, whether or not to push the stranger onto the tracks thus killing him but saving five other lives.

Looking at this scenario and viewing it from different perspectives, the man should not be pushed off the bridge. For a utilitarian, the only morally significant factor is the number of lives that are saved regardless of how they are saved. There needs to be an emphasis on the rules and obligations with respect to morality to guide conduct and morally forbid certain actions. The utilitarian approach of John Stuart Mill is that one should always act; not only to increase one’s own happiness but to maximize overall happiness and the pain or pleasure of others must be taken into account equally. Taking this into consideration, it would be fair to say that the classic utilitarian would kill the fat stranger instead of the five as only one person will endure the pain and suffering. This is where utilitarian reasoning is morally incorrect as it shows the lack of empathy and distances the protagonist from his moral values and beliefs.

Human beings cannot make perfectly objective decisions because we let our emotions rule over our reasoning. Pushing a fat man to his death with our bare hands would set off an emotional alarm in my brain and hence, such utilitarian reasoning does not inspire strong moral convictions. Mill views social utility as "preserving the peace and harmony" but actively killing a person is a direct infringement of his rights and a severe violation to society. If we continue to have such a society where we always act for the greater good where we kill innocent people, the minority