A Dilemma and My Solution Based On Utilitarianism Ethical Model
(Assignment # 1)
Prepared by : Efren A.
Course-Section : GNED212-091
Instructor : Mr. Paul B.
Class : Friday Afternoons
Part 1: Utilitarianism Ethical Model
Many people from all walks of life have trouble making decisions in their everyday lives, especially on tough or critical situations that may even involve life and death considerations. To address this issue, there are four ethical models and four ethical principles developed as guidance in making decisions in an ethical way. One of the four ethical models is the Utilitarianism. This model is based on the principle that the best decision is the one that gives benefits to most or causes harm to
…show more content…
So long as a course of action produces maximum benefits for everyone, utilitarianism does not care whether the benefits are produced by lies, manipulation, or coercion (Manuel Velasquez, 1989).
Utilitarianism ethics has two types. One is act utilitarianism and the other is rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism conforms to the description of utilitarianism mentioned above while rule utilitarianism considers also the adherence to the law and fairness of the decision. A rule utilitarian seeks to benefit the most people but through the fairest and most just means available. Therefore, added benefits of rule utilitarianism are that it values justice and includes beneficence at the same time (Rainbow). However, utilitarianism (both act and rule) has numerous flaws like in all other theories. First, there is uncertainty as to the outcome which is the basis of the decision. Outcomes maybe inferred from life experiences or from logical evaluations but no one can be certain of the actual outcome in the future. Wrong prediction of the outcomes resulting to less benefit or more harm, makes the utilitarian decision as unethical. Second, predicted outcomes of different nature like money (tangible) against happiness (intangible) are not really comparable, making a quantified advantage of the other is debatable. Last but not the least, there
In certain scenarios regarding Ethics, it is common to reach a conclusion through the concept of Consequentialism. This is said to have been accurate for centuries, as Consequentialism focuses strictly on the outcome and consequences of actions. The reason for this is the common belief by many that outcome is everything. Throughout the last three weeks, I have developed a better view on Consequentialism. Through the writings of Jeremy Bentham and John Mill, I have learned basic methods of applying Utilitarianism and Consequentialism to ethical situations. As a brief overview, Utilitarianism focuses on maximizing the “good” and minimizing the “bad” in life. The broader concept of Consequentialism seeks the positive aspects and despises the negative.
Let’s start by gaining an understanding of what utilitarianism means. The definition given to us earlier in our textbook, Exploring Ethics, in the article, Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism, it defines act utilities as an act that, “is right if and only if it results in as much good as any available alternative”. This goes back to the tedious task of trying to analyze countless number of alternatives and figure out which one brings about the most
Although utilitarianism appears to be a simplistic theory, it in actuality is one of a more complex nature. There are many variables to consider when evaluating a utilitarian path of ethics. For example, whose happiness is more important and should be maximized? When organizations decide which is the better path to take for the group, they put into consideration only their own
Classical utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory which holds that an action can only be considered as morally right where its consequences bring about the greatest amount of good to the greatest number (where 'good' is equal to pleasure minus pain). Likewise, an action is morally wrong where it fails to maximise good. Since it was first articulated in the late 19th Century by the likes of Jeremy Bentham and later John Stewart Mill, the classical approach to utilitarianism has since become the basis for many other consequentialist theories such as rule-utilitarianism and act-utilitarianism upon which this essay will focus (Driver, 2009). Though birthed from the same
Utilitarianism is a philosophical theory. It concerns how to evaluate a large range of things that involve choices communities or groups face. These choices include policies, laws, human’s rights, moral codes,
Utilitarianism is a practical doctrine that is widely accepted in modern society’s economics, politic, and ethics. Utilitarian is driven by the pursuit of happiness. For a utilitarian, everything that will be helpful in the pursuit is considered good. In utilitarianism, an action is good or evil based on its consequences on the happiness of an individual and the happiness of the community. Similar to other doctrine, utilitarianism is not without a flaw. Bernard Williams, in his paper Utilitarianism and Integrity, voices his primary concern in regard to utilitarianism by providing two concrete examples to demonstrate how utilitarianism is only concerned about the consequences of the action and not about the means used to get there. Williams argues that utilitarianism fails to acknowledge the integrity of a person because the ultimate goal of utilitarianism is to produce the greatest happiness overall.
In this paper, I will discuss various ethical courses of action during ethical dilemmas. I will be examining how utilitarians and deontologists use different approaches to solve ethical dilemmas, by citing the text “Doing Ethics: Moral Reasoning and Contemporary Issues” and views of philosophers such as John Stuart Mill, Immanuel Kant and Jeremy Bentham. Using these, I will develop an argument for why I think the most ethical course of action varies from person to person, and why this is as a result of flaws in both utilitarianism and deontology
One primary belief of people who have adopted the Utilitarian position is that the most ethical action is the one that results in the greatest good (happiness) for the greatest number (MacKinnon, 2013, p. 32). Furthermore, the best action is the one that causes the least harm to the fewest people. Equally important, are the consequences that result from your action.
A utilitarian will focus on the consequences of an act rather than on the nature of the act. In addition to this, happiness of people should be sacrificed only to bring greater happiness to other people. Thus, one must be in total compliance with the wellbeing of all as a whole and not what is in the best interest of themselves to be a true utilitarian. “Utilitarianism, therefore, could only attain its end by the general cultivation of nobleness of character, even if each individual were only benefited by the nobleness of others, and his own, so far as happiness is concerned, were a sheer deduction from the benefit. But the bare enunciation of such an absurdity as this last, renders refutation superfluous” (Mill).
Utilitarianism argues that, given a set of choices, the act we should choose is that which produces the best results for the greatest number affected by that choice.
As a theory, Utilitarianism has several positive aspects. First, Utilitarianism is extremely simple in its determination of the morality of an action. If an action will make the individual or other people happier overall, then an individual should do that action. If an action will not make the individual or other people unhappier overall, then the individual should not do the action (Mill, 54). In this way, Utilitarianism follows closely to basic human logic. For, humans are most often rewarded when
First we must look through the eyes of a utilitarian and their approach to ethics with the Utilitarianism theory. The Utilitarianism theory’s
Utilitarianism has an extensive history and will be proven to be one of the most unconditional and plausible theories of normative ethics. Two attractive features of utilitarianism are the flexibility and impartiality that it maintains. Utilitarianism affirms that everyone’s happiness is evenly matched to the next persons. The flexibility holds that utilitarian’s do not believe that any action is intrinsically wrong.
Utilitarianism perspectives can be found in many situations throughout history. It is “one of the most powerful and persuasive approaches to normative ethics in the history of philosophy” (Driver). Utilitarianism suggests that “the morally right action
A critical debate between utilitarians is whether rightness of an act is determined by the actual consequence or the predictable consequence. Actual consequence utilitarians maintain that an act is wrong is if the consequence is wrong even when the moral agent