Luxturna Essay

A consequentialist, like Joshua Greene for example, would argue that morality is “goal directed”. If the goal that is desired is moral, then the decisions and actions to achieve this goal are also moral. If the consequences are good, then a person’s actions are good; if the consequences are bad, a person’s actions are bad or immoral, according to consequentialists. Therefore, from the utilitarian perspective, human behavior is neither good or bad, right or wrong; it is the consequences of the behaviors and actions that determine the morality (Behrens and Rosen 280). In the book “Utlitarianiam: A Guide for the Perplexed”, Krister Bykvist explains the classic version of utilitarianism, known as the maximizing act-utilitarianism, says that “an act is right just in case it leads to more total well-being than any other alternative action” (Bykvist). This approach tries to both increase good consequences and to reduce bad consequences (Behrens and Rosen 276). The utilitarian approach, therefore, does not base morality upon emotional feelings, but rather upon reason

Consequentialism is a broad ethical theory that describes one 's actions to be good or bad depending solely upon the consequences of those actions. The distinguishing element of this theory from others is that the action itself has no value without analyzing the expected consequences, as explained by William H. Shaw in “Consequentialism”, “...when it comes to rightness or wrongness, nothing matters but the results of our actions” (Shaw 28). Then the question is, what exactly does it mean for a consequence to be deemed 'good '? Utilitarianism, a more specific form of consequentialism, answers this by describing a 'good ' action to be one that brings about the most happiness or well-being for everyone. John Stuart Mill states, “The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals “utility” or the “greatest happiness principle” holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness: wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Mill 7). This theory seems simple when applied to everyday situations. However, it can become tricky when applied to more complex, multi-faceted, situations. Obviously there are differentiating levels of happiness. For example, in a situation where it seems there may be no such thing as a happy outcome, the anticipated consequence that is deemed to be the 'lesser of two evils ' would be perceived to bring about the most well-being compared to the other choice. This theory may also seem difficult because it is based on

Consequentialism is a class of ethical theories stating that the consequences of one’s actions are the superior judge as far as to what is right or wrong, moral or immoral. The doctrine of Utilitarianism falls under the umbrella of consequentialism and suggests that actions are right if they are deemed as useful or are for the benefit of the majority. Alongside that, Utilitarians argue that everyone counts and everyone counts equally. This imposes that each being, belonging to the moral community, is owed a certain amount of respect and acknowledgment of needs. As far as who “everyone” truly is and who belongs in the moral community, Utilitarians believe that all beings that can suffer deserve a home in the moral community. Therefore humans and non-human animals, who are both susceptible to suffering, are morally equal.

Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a common cause of irreversible blindness in the elderly. AMD is characterized by the progression from early to intermediate stages of the disease. The two major advanced forms are the geographic atrophy (GA) AMD and neovascular AMD. GA or “dry” AMD is characterized by loss of retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) cells and outer layers of the neurosensory retina as well as the choriocapillaris. Neovascular or "wet" AMD is characterized by the formation of choroidal neovascularization (CNV), the ingrowth of new blood vessels from the choriocapillaris through Bruch's membrane into the sub pigment epithelium or subretinal

“A utilitarian analysis involves identifying relevant stakeholders, predicting and quantifying the pain and pleasure affecting each stakeholder as a result of the action, and a determination of whether the action contributes more to net happiness than the alternative” (West, 2016).

Utilitarianism is an ethical theory, originally developed by Jeremy Bentham, and worked upon by many people, such as J.S Mill and Peter Singer, later. The theory states that for an action to be moral, the consequences must cause the greatest overall happiness for the greatest number of people. It strives for the greatest balance of pleasure over pain, and so consequences must be thought about. This consequentialist idea is natural for people; in many situations, one will contemplate what the outcome of their actions may be. The teleological approach of judging consequences and making a choice rather than following set rules makes the theory much more flexible than others. The idea of free choice sounds appealing, however in practice, the theory has many issues.

Cohen and Ahn (2016) argue that moral judgments are utilitarian, though subjective. People try to save the competing item with the greatest personal value. People tend to assess the value of an item with their preconceived prior notions, their beliefs, emotions, and interests. Reason and emotion are two features of a single subjective utilitarian decision process. According to Cohen and Ahn (2016), the utilitarian model starts with the premise that each choice has a psychological value to the decision maker. The personal value of the choice is represented by a distribution of values among a continuum. The personal value of an item is influenced by many features (Cohen and Ahn, 2016). This is to include both perceptual and cognitive factors. Perceptual factors include the observer’s phenomenological experience of multiple qualities of the item. The cognitive factors include the observer’s calculation of the relative importance of each quality of the item to the detection of the target (Cohen and Ahn, 2016).

There are many ocular diseases affect the optic nerve and lead to vast damage of vision. One of the common diseases is glaucoma, which is known as the second leading cause of blindness after cataracts. Worldwide, one to two percent of 40 older adults more than 40 years approximately have glaucoma with vision loss. It veritably equates 8.4 million people who are infected with glaucoma being blind1, 4. According to ophthalmologists, they define glaucoma as serious irreversible ocular neuropathy disease2. Even though this disease is known as an irreversible condition, a greater understanding of the types and the risk factors can contribute to the management of treatment.

Utilitarianism as an example of consequentialism is a moral theory generally considered to have started in the late eighteenth century. In the book Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill he defined the ethical theory stating that “…actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness”(7). The idea behind the theory is that people seek happiness, and that the ultimate goal of all human beings is to be happy. Therefore, according to the utilitarianism greatest happiness principle, when a person wishes to act in an ethically sound manner, he or she should strive to bring about the greatest possible amount of happiness for the greatest possible amount of people. In contrast, the distinction of a consequentialist theory of ethics from other ethical theories is that non-consequentialist judge the rightness or wrongness of an action based on the essential goods and not based on generating the greatest good. Indeed, utilitarian’s do not care about people’s personal agenda or whether their actions happen to hurt others. As long as the eventual results lead to more pleasure than pain, it is considered morally right.

Utilitarians believe that whether an act is right or wrong depends only on the consequences it produces. An act that results in at least as much pleasure or well being as other alternative acts is right, and vice versa. In other words, any act that does not maximize pleasure is morally wrong. Even though utilitarian ethics often clashes with conventional norms, the conflict has no direct moral relevance to the action.

Deriving the ethicality of actions from both the compliance with the rules and the consequences that result from the actions is the basis of rule-consequentialism. First, it is pertinent that the value of a rule is determined, in order to determine whether the value of an action is enough to surpass it. Value, as defined by Hugh LaFollette and Ingmar Persson in their book The Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory, can be measured by the presence of pleasure and absence of pain, or the fulfillment of one’s desires (238). This view offers two options for determining whether a rule is ethical: as the rule can be judged by it’s ability to inhibit pain and enable pleasure, or the ability to promote the fulfilment of people’s desires.When discussing

John Stuart Mill suggests that a person’s ethical decision-making process should be based solely upon the amount of happiness that the person can receive. Although Mill fully justifies himself, his approach lacks certain criteria for which happiness can be considered. Happiness should be judged, not only by pleasure, but by pain as well. This paper will examine Mill’s position on happiness, and the reasoning behind it. Showing where there are agreements and where there are disagreements will critique the theory of Utilitarianism. By showing the problems that the theory have will reveal what should make up ethical decision-making. John Stuart Mill supports and explains his reasoning in his book, Utilitarianism. Mill

The two most vital consequentialist theory is egoism and utilitarianism. Under utilitarianism theory, we aim to product the greatest happiness for the greatest number of participants. The greatest happiness is the only decisive component to evaluate whether an action is right or wrong (Shaw et al, 2013).

Luxottica Group S.p.A. is an Italian eyewear company founded 56 years ago in Agordo, Italy. This company based in Milan is the world's largest eyewear company. Furthermore, as a vertically integrated company, Luxottica is designing, manufacturing, distributing and retailing its eyewear brands including LensCrafters, Sunglass Hut, Apex by Sunglass Hut, Pearle Vision, Sears Optical, Target Optical, Eye med vision care plan, and Glasses.com. Its best-known brands are Ray-Ban, Persol, and Oakley. Luxottica also makes sunglasses and prescription frames for designer brands such as Chanel, Prada, Giorgio Armani, Burberry, Versace, Dolce and Gabbana, Miu Miu, DKNY and Tory Burch among others. Luxottica's mission is to protect the

Utilitarianism in its most basic form explains that actions are only right or wrong in proportion to the amount of right or wrong they produce. It lies upon the idea of a highest good or “summum bonum” which is its foundation of morality. This theory is actually in opposition to the idea of egoism, which proposes that a person should go after their own self-interest rather than worry about the expense of others. In fact, this theory argues against any moral or ethical theory that looks at actions independently of their repercussions. In this paper I will spell out the theory of Utilitarianism and its premises, and then discuss a possible objection to it, stating that Utilitarianism gives wrong answers to moral and ethical questions.