Ethical Rule Vs Utilitarianism

There are several theories that try to explain the morality of the actions; however, two stand out. the first is deontology, and the other one is utilitarianism. The former follow the idea that the consequences of you action hold no importance in what we ought to do. But rather, some actions are morally wrong or good by itself. The latter follows an opposite view in which the consequences of an action are what it makes an action moral. Specially, if that action produce the greatest happiness over unhappiness. In this essay I will focus on two Utilitarianism ramifications, act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. They both agree that consequences must be the greatest factor in deciding what we ought to do. Nonetheless they have one big difference. Rule Utilitarianism generalize acts and recreate the consequences of a rule. If the consequences are ultimately favoring, then it is morally right. By way of contrast, Act Utilitarianism evaluate each action individually, and similar situation would have different outcomes depending on the situation. There is no universal rule unlike rule utilitarianism.

In 1975 the board of directors for a company that makes transistors were presented with an ethical dilemma. They were the last transistor company that was selling to a pacemaker company as a result of other companies backing out of the business due to the failure of some pacemakers leading to deaths of some of those who used them. At the time, pacemaker technology was extremely new and had yet to develop into the ground breaking product that it is today. The ethical dilemma presented to the board was whether or not to continue to sell their transistor to the company and risk the negative connotation and ultimately the loss of shareholders in the company, associated with the deaths that occurred (Shanks, 1996). This

Have you eaten breakfast this morning? Put on clean clothes? Did you have a bed to sleep in at the end of your day? For millions of less fortunate around the world, the answer to those questions is no. Knowing this is true, can you continue to go about your day and claim to be a moral and ethical person? In order to obtain the greatest pleasure for the greatest number of people, it is clear that you in order to uphold your moral duty; you must contribute to those experiencing poverty.

First, looking from a rule utilitarian point, the question must be asked what does a rule utilitarian consider ethical and what might they consider unethical? The best way to define what a rule utilitarian might think is ethical would be “obey those laws, rules, and principles that tend to cause the most happiness.” Although this is the way a rule utilitarian would think, what really matters in the end is if it did or did not end up causing the most happiness, so the thinking may be ethical, but if in the end more people are unhappy when the law tends to make more people happy, people are still unhappy in the end so the choice was unethical. Whatever in the end causes the most happiness is the most ethical thing to do according to a rule utilitarian.

Utilitarianism has some positive aspects and some problems within the theory, like any theory. There are ways to try to improve it by creating act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism. J.J.C. Smart of La Trobe University evaluates the difference between the two and their inevitability. He also inspects how consequentialism is going to hurt the theory of utilitarianism. Also, Rawls is going to propose a solution to this problem. His theory, Justice as Fairness, seeks to have everyone be seen as an equal in the world. Although this could solve a few of utilitarianism’s problems, it also creates new ones. First, utilitarianism is the belief that an act is morally just if the outcome benefits the majority of people, providing utility. In theory, utilitarianism is inherently great, therefore there should be little debate on whether an action is morally acceptable if it benefited the most amount of people. In broad situations this is suitable, but there are a few times where utilitarianism is immoral. This includes tyranny of the majority, impersonality, and the fact that it is reliant on the results that take place from an action, not the intentions of the action.

There are many ethical theories that are covered in Engineering Ethics; one of these theories is utilitarianism. A utilitarian believes an act is morally wrong or right based on the consequences of an action. The thought process of a utilitarian will be discussed in order to decide whether downloading online copyrighted files is morally right or wrong. In order to create a conclusion, the utilitarian theory must first be defined. Within the utilitarian theory, there are four distinctions that deal with the application of the principle of utility.

Situation four was presented to my mother. She stated that it is a very horrible complex situation. Initially, she chose to tell him to keep silent and she would do the same. When asked why she said, “because a lot more people will suffer.” This would be a point of view aligned with a utilitarianism ethical belief system. However, she then changed her mind and reasoned that what he did was wrong, the reason for his confession to her after 14 years was guilt for the wrongdoing, and in order to relieve the guilt she would tell him that he should confess. She said she would not turn him in but suggest that he turns himself into the authorities. She also stresses that the revelation would definitely alter their relationship and she would not be

Utilitarianism, as described in An Introduction to Catholic Ethics, is a philosophy made popular in the early 19th century. This “consequentialist” philosophy had been studied by and branched from two English philosophers by the names of, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Utilitarianism can even be linked back to as far as 341-270 BC with the Epicurates. “What is utilitarianism?”, one might ask. Utilitarianism is an idea that can be simply grounded on the belief of human reasoning. When referring to Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill is the name that is often brought up.

The principles of utilitarianism are based on maximizing pleasure/happiness and minimize suffering or pain (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). In this case, the retiring officer does not see smoking pot as an issue and stopping to address the issue will cause him pain by most likely not going home on time. The trainee, he will gain happiness/pleasure by doing his job and addressing the issue. On the other hand, the teens are engaging in pleasure (getting high) and being confronted by the police will cause suffering in the form of stopping their activity. However, utilitarianism also asks us to predict the future and this is something we cannot do and the outlined actions may not even take place. If the police stop to address the issue, it may become violent and someone may get hurt or worse. Or, it may become a non-issue and all parties walk away with a mutual feeling of happiness. But, when applied to moral principles, the issue should be addressed; it is the duty of law

Utilitarianism began when Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill aided legislators to choose which laws were correct on an ethical stand point. These two men believed that moral actions are the ones that give lead to more positive than negative actions. When using this approach to examine an issue you create a list of the different options available. Then you play devils advocate to see what good and bad will come from every action. Finally you choose the action that will have the most positive affect and the least negative ones.

According to Kernohan (2012), the Utilitarian ethical theory holds that human beings should maximize the happiness or utility of everyone within a given society instead of solely focusing on personal happiness. Additionally, while maximizing these pleasurable feelings and experience, painful sensations in any form, should be eliminated. However, Utilitarianism ignores certain aspects of society such as justice, where unjust actions may be associated with a happy society. For example, Utilitarianism could be used by dictators to justify the lack of democracy within a political system. Furthermore, a dictatorship may result in a happy nation that depends on corruption and other unethical actions. In certain situations, a person or a group may

Utilitarianism is a theory that was founded by Jeremy Bentham and was later revised by John Stuart Mill. This theory is based on producing the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people and all self-aware beings on Earth. Utilitarianism factors in the amount of bad and good that will be produced by an act. It uses this whether it is during the act or after the act has been done. A utilitarianist believes in one ultimate goal: living a life without pain and a life with many enjoyments. Pain and enjoyments are different to everyone so they are hard to judge sometimes. Mill stated that overall happiness is key and that we as a society should try to maximize quality and quantity of overall happiness.

Act utilitarianism is generally described as believing that the best course of action is the action that would bring in the most net utility. “In their view, the principle of utility—do whatever will produce the best overall results—should be applied on a case by case basis. The right action in any situation is the one that yields more utility (i.e. creates more well-being) than other available actions.” (http://www.iep.utm.edu/util-a-r/). Rule utilitarianism is generally described as 1) an action that can be justified morally if it can be turned into a justifiable moral rule, 2) a moral rule can be justified if its moral code can create more utility than any other possible rules or no rules at all. According to act rule, we must judge a person

After filling out the Ethical Inventory again I found that Utilitarianism and Virtue Ethics are the two areas that made the most persuasive thinking for me. Utilitarianism looks at the consequences and weighs the positives to see if it is going to bring happiness to the greater number. Every situation is looked at from a pros and cons point of view and a decision is made from there. One statement that is on the inventory sheet says, “When I am trying to decide what the right thing to do is, I look at the consequences of the various alternatives open to me.” In this example for myself I usually don’t think about consequences and react on emotions. After reacting from emotions I think about the consequences and realize most of the time it wasn’t the right thing to do. There are many times that I react and then realize I could’ve done things differently in that situation. I think about my own self interest before I think about the effects of the greater number. I see myself now looking at the situation and seeing both sides of it. I look at the positives and negatives before I react on emotions. By learning more about utilitarianism and changing my thought process I see my virtue ethics in a different perspective compared to what I did before this class. All the virtues that are stated in the book are virtues I hold very deeply in myself. These virtues are courage, generosity, honesty, loyalty to friends and family. Courage was one I had a hard time with because I don’t always

The main slogan of utilitarianism is as follows, “What makes me happy gives me pleasure, what gives me pleasure makes me happy.” The first sound of this sentence seems very intriguing and may cause many to believe that utilitarianism mean well. However, many basic things can cause pleasure such as; sex, drugs, food, art, etc. Therefore, isn’t it true that too much of one good thing can be terribly bad? Many see sex as a good and pleasurable thing, but there are nymphomaniacs who currently struggle to rid themselves from such an addiction, the same as drug abusers rely on rehab facilities to help them overcome substance abuse. Of course, drugs often save lives, sex is pleasurable, and food enables us to survive, and art is a very astonishing