A Real Life Example Of Utilitarianism

The end of World War Two in Europe, or V-E day made two things very clear. First, that America showed itself as a world power, and the second was that Russia had no intentions of leaving the land it had taken on its way to Berlin. With the war in the pacific still ongoing, the Americans had to turn its focus to the war on the islands and deal with Russia afterwards. Eventually in July of 1945, an end to the pacific theater of war came (V-J day) with the dropping of the two atomic bombs, little boy and fat man, on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The decision to drop the first bomb was made by new president Harry Truman, and was not only used to force Japan into an unconditional surrender, but also to intimidate the Solviet Union.

Dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not a clear-cut decision. Nonetheless, the decision had to be made. Harry S. Truman and his associated generals (Stimson and Groves) had to determine how to swiftly end the war in the most humane way. Was it better to end the war immediately with gruesome force or to continue the war? In the end, Truman and his generals, the moral actors, decided that the best course of action was to drop the atomic bombs on Japan. Truman stated that “it was a decision to loose the most terrible of all destructive forces for the wholesale slaughter of human beings” (Truman, 1945). As a result of this decision, it appeared that thousands of Japanese citizens’ lives had been invalidated. Truman refuted this idea by saying “the decision to use the bomb saved not only American soldiers but also the Japanese,” (Hasegawa, 2005). Including both the lives of Japanese civilians and soldiers. With this reasoning, Truman is trying to instill the idea that he had made the most ethical decision by sacrificing the lives of the inhabitants of Hiroshima and Nagasaki for the end of the war. Originally, it was planned that the bomb would be dropped on Kyoto, a populous city, but he quickly decided against it as the casualty count would be incredibly high (Truman, 1945). With this hesitation to release such carnage in Japan, targeting citizens in wartime is clearly immoral, but with the circumstances at hand, the decision wasn’t necessarily unethical.

The atomic bomb was powerful enough that one of them could cause devastating threats and end the war. Two atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in August 1945. These atomic bombs took away the lives of all 20 million people at one time, and Japan immediately declared surrender in August 15th. During the Second World War, in May 1945, Germany surrendered to the Allies, and the battle is over. But, Japan had showed no signs of surrender to the Allies in the fight against the Philippines. Thus, President of United States decided to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima to beat the Japan. (854, 863-864,

2 massive atomic bombs were dropped on Japan. America hoped for mass destruction and death, which is the exact result given. Only 5 days after, Japan gave in and brought World War II to an end (Hall, 2003). America reached victory, and no one would ever doubt or underestimate the United States ever again.

The U.S demanded Japan to give up the war or the U.S would end the war in mass destruction.Japan refused to give up their fight in the war and that gave Truman the decision to use the bombs. Japan had no idea of any new weapons that had been made by the U.S during WW2. 1945, the first of two atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima. On the 9th of August, the second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki which killed many Japanese. The Japanese had officially given up their war with the U.S.

The United States government, led by President Harry S. Truman at the time, produced some of the most tactical and technological advances during World War II. The most devastating of these advances is proven to be the atomic bombs that were used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki forcing Japan to surrender. This bomb played a crucial part in the ending of World War II. The decision to drop the atomic bomb was used as a last resort in order to defend and protect the United States. Although many disagree, it is safe to say that dropping these atomic bombs was unjust; the decision is extremely controversial as it has caused many military, political, and ethical disagreements.

When Truman was sworn in as president World War Two was just about over due to Hitler committing suicide and Germany’s surrender. Although Germany had surrendered and the war with them was over, the war with Japan was further away from the end (“Foreign Affairs”). Military planners estimated that the war with Japan would call for an allied invasion of Japan and would take at least another year and cost at least another 200,000 American casualties. When Truman learned of the success of the testing of the atomic bomb in Potsdam the idea of possibly ending the war sooner grew on him. He decided he would use the threat of an atomic bomb to persuade Japan to surrender, but Japan

First of all, the dropping of the atomic bomb caused the Japanese to surrender and leading to the end of the war. For the reason that, after the first bomb was dropped on the city of Hiroshima, yet Japan did not want to surrender. The Japanese empire surrender after that second atomic bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki. According to Harrys S Truman’s Decision “One week later, on August 14, 1945, after the second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, the Japanese surrendered” . The results of the significant and brave decision that President Truman made; put a stop to many issues that may had occurred during the WWII. Nevertheless, the usage of the second atomic bomb made the Japanese realize that the United States had created a powerful weapon, and lead to their surrender. Second of all, the atomic bomb was the most proper manner in avoiding a Japanese invasion. The United States was mostly concern on an unexpected invasion or attack from Japan, such as the attack on Pearl Harbor. According to the article History, President Roosevelt commented “I believe I interpret the will of the congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.” Moreover, the unexpected attack on Pearl Harbor is a perfect example of the damages that they

When the Japanese choose not to surrender President Truman makes the decision to use the atomic bomb rather than risk the 1,000,000 projected lives lost in a man to man combat war. Hiroshima was a chosen as

On August 6, 1945, “Little Boy” the first atomic bomb, was dropped on the city of Hiroshima and three days later, “Fat Man” a second bomb, was dropped on Nagasaki, resulting in the untimely death of over 20,000 people. This was done as an offensive and retaliation by the United States of America, whom had feeling of revenge and an unwavering desire to end an ongoing war as quickly and decisively as possible, against the Japanese for the bombing of Pearl Harbor. However, this took place right after a demand for an unconditional surrender of the Japanese by the Allied leaders by means of a Potsdam Declaration, in late July 1945, was flatly rejected by Japanese leaders. Thus resulting in the use of these atomic bombs being authorized by President Truman.

When faced with the prospect of killing a few to save many, it may be difficult to discern whether doing so would be moral or not. However, when Harry S. Truman was forced to decide whether or not to drop the atomic bombs on Japan, the moral choice was clear: dropping the bombs was the most viable option available that would end World War II, minimize casualties on both sides of the war, and ensure American victory. Every other option available to Truman would have resulted in a much greater loss for the people of both Japan and the United States. While dropping atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was undeniably an atrocity, which resulted in over 300,000 casualties, this gruesome attack was the most ethical option available to Harry S. Truman for defeating Japan’s barbaric regime and ending the bloodiest war in human history.

The decision to use the atom bomb had a few moral dilemmas for President Truman. Some of these were unleashing a new massive destructive weapon for the first time that would take the lives of thousands, but this would possibly end the war. On April 12, 1945 President Roosevelt suddenly died and Harry Truman became the president of the United States. Just after becoming president Germany had just been defeated ending the war in Europe.

These cases pose great difficulties for the Utilitarian. (Many (if not all?)have to do with what Jonathan Glover calls THE ACTS AND OMISSIONS DOCTRINE; this states that `in certain contexts, failure to perform an act, with certain foreseen bad consequences of that failure, is morally less bad than to perform a different act which has identical foreseen bad consequences.'(Thus it is worse to KILL someone than merely to LET SOMEONE DIE (or to let someone else kill them. Thus some Catholics would justify the bombing of military targets in The Second World War even when such bombing was bound to cause civilian casualties). The Utilitarian is committed to REJECTING The Acts and Omissions Doctrine; but this seems unacceptable. (Failing to send money to the starving is wrong, but it is not as wrong as sending the starving poisoned food – Philippa Foot).

The decision to drop the Atomic bombs was a hard one to make. The bomb had not been tested until July 1945, and, while Truman was aware that radiation would linger, the extent of the damaging effects were unknown. The United States was in a situation where the war in the Pacific had no end in sight. Operation Downfall would have ended in heavy losses on both sides and alternatives to the bomb didn’t guarantee a quick end to the fighting. Truman did the right thing by dropping the bombs, as it shortened the war. At the time, it was the best course of action he

The case I chose to apply utilitarianism to is case number three. In case three, I am working for the number one car manufacturer in the country. Our latest model the Hipster is planned to be released but has potential brake issues. These brake malfunctions could cause serious injuries from accidents due to drivers being unable to stop the vehicle. The requirement is to submit a report and let consumers know that there is a recall after the government department approves the recall. However, this recall will end up costing the company a huge amount of money, which will end up taking away from profits. If the company pretended to not knowing about the defective brakes it would save the company money. This would also put our customers at risk. The Hipster models were supposed to be held in customs while an investigation was being made. But, the Hipster models were released without any changes and certifications. Now it is my job to see if I should look more into this event based on applying the principles of utilitarianism. I will apply the thought processes of act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism in the case scenario to give a better understanding of each principle.