Example Of Act Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism, in the contrary, is based on the principle of utility or usefulness. Utility is what encourages an agent to act in a particular way (Tuckett, 1998). Utility can be explained as maximizing the good like pleasure and happiness and minimizing the bad like pain and evil, all leading to the greater good for all parties involved. It weights the consequences of the actions equally between the ones involved, and the ethical solution would be to follow the greater good for most if not all the parties involved.

Euthanasia is direct action towards an ill person to ultimately end their life (Rachel 245). Viewing the performance of euthanasia should vary according to how severe the illness and pain is that the patient has. In an extreme utilitarianism perspective, act of euthanasia is morally right if it is what the patient wants and if everyone else is in agreement. On the contrary if the patient is terminally ill and in incapable of deciding on what should be done then, the decision should be left to someone who knows the patient well enough to know what would the patient most likely want to be done. Does everyone in agreement of making a decision on the patient’s behalf make the act of euthanasia morally

Utilitarianism is a theory aimed at defining one simple basis that can be applied when making any ethical decision. It is based on a human’s natural instinct to seek pleasure and avoid pain.

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 consequentialist theory that judges an action on its outcomes and aims to maximize happiness. This means finding the action that generates the “greatest good for the greatest number”.

Utilitarianism is the moral doctrine that we should always act to produce the greatest possible balance of good over bad for everyone affected by our actions (Shaw & Barry, 62).

Utilitarianism is about maximizing the total benefit for the greatest number and reducing suffering. A specific example of Utilitarianism that could solve an ethical issue would be taking away the ability to have or use a gun. This would mean that no one, including police, security, etc. would be able to obtain one. This would prevent wars, and killings, causing a calmer and quieter society and an overall greater happiness.

Illegally downloading music from the Internet is a significant moral dilemma because while no physical harm is being done to anyone, the artists who create the songs are not being compensated for their work. Pirating music can constitute as stealing because the music that is being illegally downloaded is not being paid for. While pirating raises a moral concern, many people still download music illegally every day without justifying their actions. In this paper, I will attempt to use act utilitarianism to explain why illegally downloading music is a moral act, while rule utilitarianism says it is not a moral act. Utilitarianism can be used to justify pirating music because the act of pirating music can ultimately lead to a greater good for

In a utilitarian perspective, the principle of beneficence is to do good and to uphold the well being and on the contrary non-malfeasance means we should not harm others, and these principles are consequentialist, because they depict our attention to the outcome of an action (Collier & Haliburton, 2015, p. 36). There are two types of utilitarianism. In act utilitarianism, we select the action that maximizes the greatest amount of happiness to the most people, despite of what that action is (Collier & Haliburton, 2015, p. 10). This suggests it is permissible to cause harm even if one healthy person must sacrifice their organ and happiness to bring the happiness of others, take on the risks of surgery, and the chance of jeopardizing their future

I also believe that act utilitarianism is preferable. I liked your examples on number two. I believe that every moral choice should be situational. If someone was to ask a controversial question then they make get the response “It depends.” I often answer questions with this statement. In my opinion a decision should made based on the situation. Scope is an aspect that is used in act utilitarianism, which applies to your example of the terrorist. The book claims, “The greater the scope, the greater the impact on overall utility” (112). When using scope of act utilitarianism it would say kill the terrorist because in the long run the people are greater in number. On a website addressing utilitarianism it suggests, “If it is clear that breaking

Utilitarianism is a moral theory that has long been the subject of philosophical debate. This theory, when practiced, appears to set a very basic guideline to follow when one is faced with a moral dilemma. Fundamental Utilitarianism states that when a moral dilemma arises, one should take action that causes favorable results or reduces less favorable results. If these less favorable results, or pain, occur from this action, it can be justified if it is produced to prevent more pain or produce happiness. Stating the Utilitarian view can summarize these basic principles: "the greatest good for the greatest number". Utilitarians are to believe that if they follow this philosophy, that no matter what action they take, it

Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory, as explained by the philosopher Mill. Given several choices, a utilitarian would pick the morally correct choice by using the Greatest Happiness Principle (487). By looking at whether the consequences of an action will produce the greater happiness for the greater number of people than another action would, one can

Utilitarianism is the ethical belief that the happiness of the greatest number of people is the greatest good. Jeremy Betham and John Stuart Mill are two philosophers that were leading advocates for the utilitarianism that we study today. In order to understand the basis of utilitarianism, one must know what happiness is. John Stuart Mill defines happiness as the intended pleasure and absence of pain while unhappiness is pain and the privation of pleasure. Utilitarians feel the moral obligation to maximize pleasure for not only themselves, but for as many people as possible. All actions can be determined as right or wrong based on if they produce the maximum amount of happiness. The utilitarian belief that all actions can be determined as right or wrong based only on their repercussions connects utilitarianism to consequentialism. Consequentialism is the belief that an action can be determined morally right or wrong based on its consequences. Just like any other belief system, utilitarianism faces immense amount of praise and criticism.

The theory of Utilitarianism states that actions should be judged as right or wrong depending on whether they cause more happiness or unhappiness. It weighs the rightness and wrongness of an action based on consequences of that action.

Some believe that euthanasia should be ethically viewed similarly to suicide because of the idea of choosing to end one’s own life, which is considered unethical. However, some oppose this belief, and believe