...Explain the differences between Bentham’s and Mill’s Utilitarianism (25): Utilitarianism is a consequentialist ethical theory as the consequence of an action or rule is the main principle to judge whether an action is right or wrong. Act Utilitarianism is a teleological theory which was designed by Bentham, states that the act which produces the most pleasure was the most desirable act. Rule Utilitarianism is a deontological theory which was designed by Mill, states that that the act which produces the best act is the most desirable act - – “The greatest happiness for the greatest number”. The principle of utility states that actions are right if they promote pleasure but are wrong if they bring pain – “The greatest good [pleasure]for the greatest number.” Bentham believed that all pleasures are equal. However, Mill disagreed and stated that there were lower and higher pleasures. Firstly, Bentham stated that “quantity of pleasure being equal, push-pin (a simple child’s game) is as good as poetry” – he believed that all pleasures were the same. For example, the pleasure received from listening to music would be considered to be the same as the pleasure someone may gain from murdering someone. Mill disagreed with this. He believed that pleasures are split into two categories – higher and lower pleasures. Higher pleasures were satisfaction of the mind such as listening to classical music, and lower pleasures were pleasures of the body such as eating. He reasoned that desires...
Words: 888 - Pages: 4
...Ethical Judgments ! Utilitarianism ! An Introduction to the Moral Theories of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill Ethical philosophy differs from the sciences because it is normative or prescriptive, rather than descriptive. In other words, ethics tell us how we ought to act or what we should do, while the sciences are more likely to observe how things are in nature or society. Making Ethical Judgments Areas of Emphasis in Making Moral Judgments Purpose or Act Rule Act, Rule, Motive or Maxim Results or Consequences Making Ethical Judgments in Utilitarianism ! ! ! Utilitarianism says that the Result or the Consequence of an Act is the real measure of whether it is good or bad. This theory emphasizes Ends over Means. Theories, like this one, that emphasize the results or consequences are called teleological or consequentialist. Bentham’s Formulation of Utilitarianism ! ! ! Jeremy Bentham Man is under two great masters, pain and pleasure. The great good that we should seek is happiness. (a hedonistic perspective) Those actions whose results increase happiness or diminish pain are good. They have “utility.” 1 Jeremy Bentham’s Hedonistic Calculus ! Four Theses of Utilitarianism ! ! ! In determining the quantity of happiness that might be produced by an action, we evaluate the possible consequences by p q y applying several values: Intensity, duration, certainty or uncertainty, propinquity or remoteness, fecundity, purity,...
Words: 1546 - Pages: 7
...morally right or wrong. In this paper, I will explain the fascinating ethical theory of Utilitarianism and discuss about two very influential people to Utilitarianism, who are Jeremy Bentham, and John Stuart Mill. Along with discussing their contributes to this theory, I will evaluate their personal perspective on Utilitarianism and determine which is more plausible between the two. Ultimately, by doing this I will be able to support the idea that Utilitarianism is not an overall plausible ethical theory to follow. Utilitarianism is a type ethical theory from the ethical objective theory called Consequentialism. Much like in the Consequentialism theory, where morally right and wrong decisions are completely dependent on the consequences produce by an action, morality in Utilitarianism is reliant on the utility of the consequences produced by an action. Utility in this sense means the usefulness of a consequence or the benefits the consequence brings to those all affect by the action. Utilitarians have a strong focus on doing actions that produce the most good. This is due to the principle of utility, which in Utilitarianism states that an action is right if it produces the greatest possibly utility for all those affected by the action. In other words, if an action produces the most good, pleasure, for that situation then that action is right. Unlike in other ethical theories, in Utilitarianism an action is morally right only when it produce the most pleasure. According to Epicurus...
Words: 1910 - Pages: 8
...PHIL 1 1 May 2013 Utilitarianism: Ethics Many people in this generation are living a media influenced lifestyle based on having “no regrets” and not taking into account the effects their irresponsible behavior may result in. The world would turn into pure chaos if people lived with “no regrets,” each individual must live and know their regrets; a person should learn and build off of the mistakes that either they or someone else has made in the past. John Stuart Mill’s ethical theory of Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, which means by observing similar past events people are able to predict what may happen in their future. As a result of learning from past events a person would therefore be able to make a choice that would bring maximum utility in future occasions. "Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure" (p.412). Mill believes that looking at the motives behind an action are needed to find the source of why a certain choice was made, but the source does not always explain the action, because even though a person may be good morally they may do a wrongful action, even though they may or may not have been acting with the best of motives. However, that person can always get maximum utility (happiness) if it follows the theory of utilitarianism. Ignorance is not always...
Words: 1566 - Pages: 7
...Situation Ethics * Situation ethics was most famously championed by Joseph Fletcher (1905-1991). * He believed that we should follow the rules until we need to break them for reasons of love. * It is based on agape love (Christian unconditional love), and says that we should always do the most loving thing in any situation. * Fletcher rejected following rules regardless (legalism) and also the idea that we should not have any rules (antinomianism) and said that we need to find a balance between the two. Four working principles When establishing his version of Situation Ethics, Fletcher used four key principles which he aimed to fulfil in writing his theory: 1. Pragmatism (it has to work in daily life - it must be practical) 2. Relativism (there should be no fixed rules) 3. Positivism (it must put faith before reasoning – "I am a Christian, so what should I do?") 4. Personalism (people should be at the centre of the theory) Six Fundamental Principles There are six fundamental things that underlie Fletcher's Situation Ethics: 1. Love is the only absolute (it is intrinsically good) 2. Christian decision making is based on love 3. Justice is love distributed 4. Love wants the good for anyone, whoever they are 5. Only the end justifies the means 6. Love is acted out situationally not prescriptivally Advantages of Situation Ethics The key advantage is that it uses rules to provide a framework but allows people to break rules to reflect life's complexities...
Words: 1040 - Pages: 5
...Outline important concepts of Utilitarianism. (21) Utilitarianism is a theory which denotes actions that are right and wrong from there consequences. There are three types of Utilitarianism, act, rule and preference. Act Utilitarianism was initially developed by the theorist and psychological hedonist, Jeremy Bentham who believed that our main aim in life was to achieve 'happiness' and avoid 'pain'. He wanted to produce a different approach to moral decision making to suit the advancing society of the industrial age and argued that "natural rights is simple nonsense".This principle focuses on the individual action and the consequences that come with it. His moral rule was the 'Principle of Utility' which clearly stated that we should aim to achieve the 'greatest good for the greatest number', therefore he equated moral goodness with happiness. Bentham then created the 'hedonic calculus' to measure happiness and show the process for making moral decisions; it included seven key criteria: intensity, duration, certainty, extent, remoteness, richness and purity. Overall, the calculus gave the principle reason and allowed people to understand what was classed as a morally correct act in terms of 'happiness'. Considering the consequences of an action is a sensible approach which is not outgrown by society as it's flexible and can be applied to any situation under any circumstances; however, the fact that it is so flexible and that there are very few solid rules means that it's...
Words: 1561 - Pages: 7
...Review: Utilitarianism Mike Todd DR 38405-1 Worldview and Ethical Theory January 3, 2016 I. Introduction Mill, John Stuart, Utilitarianism, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 2001. 71 pages. ISBN: 0-87220-605-X. $6.00. John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), was the son of James Mill, colleague and fellow activist of Jeremy Bentham. Under his father’s direction, he studied in all the fields of his day, including Latin, Greek, and French, until at the age of twenty he experienced a breakdown which marked a turning point in his intellectual commitments. At that point, he began to reject the extreme rationalism with which he had grown up and to explore other avenues of philosophical thought. II. Synopsis Mill entitles...
Words: 1323 - Pages: 6
...Contextual Analysis The concept of Utilitarianism by Mill is that an action is right if it tends to promote happiness and wrong if it tends to produce the reverse of happiness- not just the happiness of the performer of the action but also that of everyone affected by it. The Rainbow Fish relates to a core notion of basic utilitarianism, the happiness of the group vs. the happiness of the individual. The basic of utilitarian tenets of "The greatest good for the greatest number" and "Maximizing happiness across the population" are easily apparent when reflecting on Rainbow Fish's decision and the consequences (Mill). In the Rainbow Fish's case, theoretically, he was going to be a little less happy if he lost his scales, but as a result his friends will become much happier. In practice, though, giving everyone a scale actually made him even happier. Mill’s theory of maximizing happiness across the population in Utilitarianism explains why Rainbow Fish becomes happier when he shares his scales with the other fish and his perspective of selfishness explains why Rainbow Fish is unhappy at first. In the book, The Rainbow Fish, there is one of the most beautiful fish in the ocean. Unlike all of the other fish, Rainbow Fish had shimmering, colorful scales. He is asked to share one of his shining scales with a little blue fish, and to which he refuses. All the other fish in the sea leave him alone, and he wondered why. He goes to the wise octopus for advice, and she tells him to give...
Words: 1392 - Pages: 6
...Name Professor Course Date Why does Mills think that Utilitarianism provides the foundation for Justice and why does Rawls reject it? Introduction The concept of utilitarianism is one that has engulfed the philosophical arena with an obscene number of arguments that support and/or criticize it. Generally, utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics that defines an action as one that ensures maximum utility. Other schools of thought would like to put it as the concept of “maximizing happiness while reducing suffering” (Mills 3).In as much as utilitarianism has continued to receive applause from people and the political scene, other divergent scholars has come up with other theories that seek to compromise the philosophies under which the concept of utilitarianism operates. As a result, utilitarianism has become subject to contradictions from other theories in the field of ethics. The thinking class in other fields of utilitarianism characterizes in as a quantitative yet reductionist approach to ethics (Mills 3). Over time, the concept of utilitarianism has received ideological threats from; deontological ethics which does not assign moral worth to an action based on its consequences, virtue ethics that solely deals with action and habits that results to happiness, pragmatic ethics and other forms of ethics that backs the idea of consequentialism. In a nut shell, the concept of utilitarianism as defined by political philosophers and in relation to justice is becoming...
Words: 3508 - Pages: 15
...According to (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/utilitarianism) that utilitarianism is “a belief that a morally good action is one that benefits the greatest number of people.” A perfect example would be Ozymandias and what he did to the city of New York during the government and foreign affairs. He believed in utilitarianism because he thought rather than nuclear bombs being sent from US to Europe to the Middle East to Russia and vice versa. Every country had nuclear weapons pointed at one another, and on the brink of a new world war. Ozymandias set off a bomb and killed thousands of people in New York, yet he simply did this all to end the tension with nuclear weapons and ended a war that was going to break out. This was exact situation was a result...
Words: 1488 - Pages: 6
...Utilitarianism Essay Shirnel Charles Grand Canyon University: PHI-305 Ethical Thinking in Liberal Arts Instructor John Wise September 21, 2014 The Story of Ethics states that the point of the Utilitarian theory is to conceptualize exactly what is good life by “bringing about consequences of a certain sort that is the greatest happiness for the greatest number” (The Story of Ethics). The Story of Ethics also states that the Utilitarian principle of greatest happiness for the greatest number was first popularized by Jeremy Bentham who according to the Lecture Note “version of utilitarianism is known as quantitative utilitarianism” (Lecture Note). According to The Story of Ethics Bentham states that the principle of utility recognizes right and wrong and the causes and effects from right and wrong. These effects can lead to the nature of mankind being either in pain or pleasure and “Bentham assumes that one can only act according to their aversion to pain or desire for pleasure” (The Story of Ethics). The understanding that I have gained from Bentham’s theory is that good and bad is judged by pleasure and pain that is the greater the pleasure the greater the good and the greater the pain the greater the bad. Bentham’s theory is the ethical position that influenced both John Stuart Mill and his father James Mill. According to an article in the Salem Press Biographical Encyclopedia “the central aim of John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism is to defend the view that those...
Words: 992 - Pages: 4
...Mill’s utilitarian theory of justice Utilitarians tend to be among those who see no major divide between justice and morality. Utilitarians see justice as part of morality and don’t see justice to have a higher priority than any other moral concern. In particular, utilitarians think that we should promote goodness (things of value), and many think that goodness can be found in a single good; such as happiness, flourishing, well-being, or desire satisfaction. Utilitarian ideas of justice connect morality to the law, economic distribution, and politics. What economic or political principles will utilitarians say we should accept? That is not an easy question to answer and is still up in the air. We have to discover the best economic and political systems for ourselves by seeing the effects they produce (90). Utilitarians often advocate for social welfare because everyone’s well-being is of moral interest and social welfare seems like a good way to make sure everyone flourishes to a minimal extent. On the other hand utilitarians often advocate free trade because (a) free trade can help reward people for hard work and encourage people to be productive, (b) the free market allows for a great deal of freedom, (c) freedom has a tendency to lead to more prosperity, and (d) taking away freedom has a tendency to cause suffering. One conception of utilitarian justice can be found in the work Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill (91). Mill said that justice was a subset of morality—“injustice...
Words: 6146 - Pages: 25
...The aim of this paper is to clearly depict how John Stuart Mill’s belief to do good for all is more appropriate for our society than Immanuel Kant’s principle that it is better to do what's morally just. I will explain why Mill’s theory served as a better guide to moral behavior and differentiate between the rights and responsibilities of human beings to themselves and society. Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill are philosophers who addressed the issues of morality in terms of how moral customs are formed. Immanuel Kant presented one perspective in The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals that is founded on his belief that the worth of man is inherent in his skill to reason. John Stuart Mill holds another belief as presented in the book, Utilitarianism, which is seemingly conflicting with the thoughts of Kant. What is most unique about the ethics of morality is the idea of responsibilities to particular individuals. According to both Mill and Kant, moral obligations are not fundamentally particularistic because they are rooted in universal moral principles. Both philosophers have made great impacts in their niche areas in the field. An analysis of their theories may help develop a better understanding of them and their theories. Mill holds an empiricist theory while Kant holds a rationalist theory. Kant explains morality through forms that he believes are essential to free and sensible judgment. Mill’s utilitarian approach is a form of consequential theory because...
Words: 2175 - Pages: 9
...Are You Happy? According to John Stuart Mill, what does it mean to act rightly or be good? Mill states how people are inclined to act rather than how they should act. He states in his essay written in 1861, Utilitarianism, “actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain and the privation of pleasure.” Mill proves by this statement that we act in a certain way because of the greatest happiness principle; however, I am not convinced that is the way that people should act or the best way to live a moral life. Mill believes that people act the way that they do for the sake of happiness. It is even good to cause pain to a small group of people if the result promotes happiness for a larger group. According to Mill, this is the greatest happiness principle because the actions are not based on the feelings of happiness of one but the happiness of the greatest number. I disagree with Mill’s greatest happiness principle because this is not the way that people should act. I agree that people tend to act that way; however that is not the moral way that people should behave. There is no rational connection between happiness and morality. The simple truth of the matter is that a behavior or action that makes a person happy is not sufficient in establishing that the behavior or action is morally accurate. Just because something makes one...
Words: 502 - Pages: 3
...Mill's Utilitarianism: Sacrifice the innocent for the common good? When faced with a moral dilemma, utilitarianism identifies the appropriate considerations, but offers no realistic way to gather the necessary information to make the required calculations. This lack of information is a problem both in evaluating the welfare issues and in evaluating the consequentialist issues which utilitarianism requires be weighed when making moral decisions. Utilitarianism attempts to solve both of these difficulties by appealing to experience; however, no method of reconciling an individual decision with the rules of experience is suggested, and no relative weights are assigned to the In deciding whether or not to torture a terrorist who has planted a bomb in New York City, a utilitarian must evaluate both the overall welfare of the people involved or effected by the action taken, and the consequences of the action taken. To calculate the welfare of the people involved in or effected by an action, utilitarianism requires that all individuals be considered equally. Quantitative utilitarians would weigh the pleasure and pain which would be caused by the bomb exploding against the pleasure and pain that would be caused by torturing the terrorist. Then, the amounts would be summed and compared. The problem with this method is that it is impossible to know beforehand how much pain would be caused by the bomb exploding or how much pain...
Words: 1326 - Pages: 6
