Act Utilitarianism Essay

The United States decision to release the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a way to terrorize the Soviet Union. The United States terrorized the Soviet Union by revealing what they were capable of doing during war. Also, the United States wanted to posture the power they had obtained throughout time.

When the Soviet Union came into possession of a nuclear bomb, the realization that the horrific aftermath, much like the one in Hiroshima, could happen in America struck fear into Americans.

Hiroshima, thousands of loved ones would have been lost; which was a decision the president

America should not have dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima because the bomb had killed millions of innocent Japanese civilians and just instantly turned them into ash, only a shadow was left of them. If children had went into bomb shelters and survived, they would not live for long because of the radiation scattered throughout the blast radius. Radiation scattered throughout Hiroshima will kill a further billion as a result. Also, they would be made orphans because their parents have been turned into nothing. The atomic bomb was very harsh, flattening all property in blast radius and people will be burnt alive. Japan was already seeking peace to many countries and more than 60 of its cities had been destroyed by conventional bombing, the home islands were being blockaded by the American navy, and the USSR entered the war in Asia by attacking Japanese troops occupying Manchuria. American refusal to modify its “unconditional surrender” demand made the Japanese even put up more resistance. If America demonstrated an explosion over Tokyo harbor would have convinced Japan’s leaders to quit without killing many people and cause them to suffer immense pain. The bomb was very expensive to make and develop. It used 2 billion US dollars to invent and make the atomic bomb. The conventional firebombing would have

by a large blind spot for 15 minutes after the blast. It was determined that

The events that led up to us being morally capable of dropping an atomic bomb on a small, and harmless village is that in 1949 the Soviet

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

While many believe the bombing of Hiroshima was justifiable and necessary to end WWII, there are still points of contention surrounding this decision. This essay will discuss the events and decisions that led up to this conclusion. Harry Truman, the U.S. President deemed responsible for this decision, was not completely informed with all the possible options and had less engagement than other associates in the decision-making process. The Soviets had just declared war on Japan which was putting pressure on the Japanese to accept surrender. The conventional methods of war were already defeating the Japanese which would have led to an eventual surrender from Japan.

One example of why the United States’ decision to use the atomic bomb should be remembered as tragedy was according to American Vision, pg. 615 “Admiral William Leahy, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, opposed using the bomb because it killed civilians indiscriminately.” This evidence supports the claim, since it shows that people in the government thought that dropping the atomic bomb is not a good idea, because it kills everyone no matter their race, or their involvement in the

If we had not done it, then Japan would’’ve gotten to us first. I know there is neither right or wrong in revenge and destruction but if it involves saving the lives of the people you govern, what choice do you have? There has been questions and controversial comments that has floated around the subject, “Did we really have to drop that bomb on Japan?”. Even though this wasn't much of beneficial to the Japanese, we the Americans had showed selfishness of saving ourselves in this case. That’s human nature when you are running the

The decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan was morally just because it ended WWII quickly, saved many American lives, and achieved revenge for Pearl Harbor. The scenario you imagined at the very beginning would have horrible to live through, but it was worth it for the United States. The atomic bombs have never been used again after this incident because of the amount of destruction they are capable of, but the United States made the correct decision in the heat of the war, and it payed off very greatly in the

On August 6th, 1945, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima without any precedent. The explosion viciously destroyed four square miles of the city and killed 90,000 and injured 40,000. (Weber, “Was Hiroshima Necessary?”) Three days later, a second atomic bomb stroked the city of Nagasaki which killed approximately 37,000 people and injured 43,000 (Weber, “Was Hiroshima Necessary?”). These actions of the United States still remain controversial today and the United States’ abuse of power and morality can be questioned. ‘Were the dropping of atomic bombs in the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a justified way to end World War Two?’. The answer is no, the bombings were not justified as Japan was already

Throughout the years people of debated about the droppings of the atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Some of the arguments against was that it was inhumane. Others have claimed the reason that the United States have dropped those bombs was to show the Soviet Union the power they had. I, however, disagree with both of those statements. It’s not because I do not care for the Japanese life, it’s because I believe this was the only way to end the war as soon as possible with less casualties. Yes, I realize it sounds a bit cruel and odd but I believe that the Japanese would not have stopped until they were relatively near genocide. Also to think that the American’s were trying to flex their muscle for the Soviets is a bit preposterous.

Opponents of Act Utilitarianism attempt to argue that Act Utilitarianism (henceforth AU) does not account for justice when applied to ethical dilemmas. It is the authors opinion that these claims are factually incorrect and this essay shall attempt to prove this through analysis of common arguments against AU, and modifying AU to allow for justice to be more readily accounted for.

Would you kill a thousand to save millions? Well the drastic actions taken by the United States did save millions. There were two actions that had to occur to save the millions and end the war, the dropping of the two atomic bombs being the first of their kind were to be the most powerful bomb ever invented using atomic and nuclear forces so create it and packed over 20,000 tons of TNT and was about ten feet long. The bomber that transported and dropped them was called the 'Enola Gay’. The two Japanese cities’ that were struck by such creations were Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In this essay I will be discussing on how the actions taken by the United States of America were completely justified in dropping the two bombs as is established a future power image, saved millions, ended the war and ended the axis of evil.