Rule Utilitarianism Analysis

In this paper I will explain how Act Utilitarianism, pure Rule Utilitarianism, and pseudo-Rule Utilitarianism would differ in their reasoning regarding the case of Al and Betty. With each method of reasoning, I evaluate the situation without background or moral assumptions of each character, and then separately with the assumption that while Al was away Betty became chronically ill and has one day left to live.

In a simplistic sense Utilitarianism, originally established by Jeremy Bentham, is the ethical and teleological theory which maintains it is the total consequences of an action which determines its rightness or wrongness; that is, it is not just my happiness which should be taken into account but the happiness of everyone concerned. However, although this is the classical approach to Utilitarianism, this theory as be interpreted in numerous ways- in this essay I will focus on three (Act, rule and preference utilitarianism). Another approach to moral philosophy was put forward by Immanuel Kant, Kant proposes that only duty and rules should govern our actions, as consequences are beyond our control. As a Deontologist Kant faces the same problems

Looking at this dilemma from the stance of an act utilitarian, I would want to come to a conclusion that would result in the best outcome for the highest number of people. The outcome should ensure happiness for the majority of employees. Proposal one may result in retaining all of the company’s employees, but none would be paid for six months. If you tack on the probable additional pay cut after the six-month period, it becomes an undesirable option. Employees working for a failing or financially unstable company are already distressed at work. Continuing to work for the company without pay puts additional stress on them and their families, and could even force some employees to quit. Quitting from a job instead of getting laid off has even

There are two different types of utilitarianism that Pojman focuses on, act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism. Act-utilitarianism is the idea that an action is right if and only if it results in as much good as any available alternative, while rule-utilitarianism is the idea that an action is right if and only if it is required by a rule that is itself a member of a set of rules whose acceptance would lead to greater utility for society than any available alternative. Although, both result in the greatest amount of good for the greatest number, the actions taken to produce this result is different in both versions of utilitarianism. In act utilitarianism, a decision is quickly made that will have the greatest amount of good as a result for the greatest number, but in rule-utilitarianism the decision has to follow a set of rules (such as don’t lie and don’t cause harm)

This may be considered a more refined version of Act Utilitarianism as it addresses some shortcoming of the earlier ethical theory by universalizing the situation. In this regard, rather than base the ethics of the situation on whether it will result in beneficence for the greatest number of people, it instead bases its ethics on the gain in happiness or loss if everyone worldwide carried out the action that is being judged. As applied to the subject issue, Rule Utilitarianism would ask, “If every corporation/company/organization paid subjected their workers to poor working conditions and poor, unfair wages, would it result in a net loss or gain of happiness?”

Person A: Hey, I have not seen you in a while. What have you been up to?

I have always been one to side with a utilitarian’s point of view, such as Mill and Bentham. The greatest happiness of the greatest number, or as cold as it may be, sacrificing the few for the good of the many. Utilitarian moral theories evaluate the moral worth of action on the basis of happiness that is produced by an action. Whatever produces the most happiness in the most people is the moral course of action. I will give the best arguments against Utilitarianism, and show in my own opinion, why I think they are wrong.

Almost every American adults in the United States of America has to fill out a tax return to see if those still owe the government some money, or if those will get some back from the government. A recurring thought in the mind of many of these adults is,” How can my taxes be this high”. The middle class is supposed to be living comfortably and not have to live their lives worrying about money. But, in today’s United States the middle class has to worry about money every single day. The upper class is almost being penalized for earning too much money based on the percentages that they have to hand over to the government. The businesses that once were able to create jobs are now having to cut jobs because of the astronomical percentages

No form of Utilitarianism addresses the concerns raised about the intrinsic value and human life, it is a simple, easily exploited mask of morality. While the claims are to maximize happiness, with the reasons being that it wants to increase the aggregate happiness in general, the theory promotes with the inverse to eliminate as much unhappiness as possible. Rather than maximizing the good for all involved, one could easily just attempt to a limit the amount of people affected by whatever deed is done, especially if the deed would be considered bad if people knew about it. By keeping the action to a select

Jill Reis Professor Segev Response Essay #4 14 November 2016 Utilitarianism or the Greatest Happiness Principle is the belief that actions are right if they are performed in order to promote happiness or benefit the majority, but wrong if they promote the reverse of happiness or inflict pain. The Utilitarian standard is “the greatest amount of pleasure altogether”. This means people should do everything they can to secure pleasure or happiness. The belief of Utilitarianism has been criticized for a number of reasons.

In chapter 9, I found utilitarianism the most intriguing lesson. It is a theory of ethics that assesses actions based on maximizing benefits in reducing the negatives; based on bouncing human interests. It was developed by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, it is a socially conscious approach to hedonism that holds that the greatest good is to promote happiness and alleviate suffering for the greatest number of people. ( Chaffee, 9.3) Utilitarianism is the most common moral theory practiced in the business world today, to break down what it is basically is morality of an act is judged by it's utility. The greatest utility that it has for the most people;

In today 's society, we face many obstacles in our attempt to achieve the feeling of happiness. As intelligent beings, we try to solve these problems by taking the path that best benefits us. The theory of utilitarianism provides a solution to this but at what cost? What are the benefits and disadvantages of utilitarianism? Is utilitarianism an idea one should live by? What is utilitarianism? I plan on answering these questions within this paper and understand how they relate to everyday life. I will also look at arguments for and against utilitarianism. Then analyze the appealing and unappealing features to determine if utilitarianism should be followed as an absolute rule.

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.

1. Utilitarians believe that “one should so act as to promote the greatest happiness (pleasure) of the greatest number of people” (Angeles 326). However, within the utilitarian community there are major splits in how we are to determine which action brings us the greatest amounts of pleasure. Today I will be focusing on two ways to determine which actions bring the greatest amount of pleasure to a situation: act and rule utilitarianism. I will define both act and rule utilitarianism, give a situation where both can be applied, and respond to an objection of utilitarianism. I will also be discussing why I believe act utilitarianism helps more people than rule utilitarianism, in turn, becoming ‘superior’ to rule utilitarianism.

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.