Social Consequentialism Essay

Its general outline is the moral rightness of an action is determined by outcomes. For example, a student was struggling to help an old lady who has fallen on ground while other people do not even care about it and a student had to leave in a hurry. However, he helped her and a lady offered cordial thanks. As the example is illustrated, the act is good if its consequences are good, but if its consequences are bad then the act is wrong. Shaw et al(2013, p. 63) emphasizes that consequentialists determine what is right by weighing the ratio of good to bad that an action will produce. According to consequentialists, the decision of the Dean of Harvard Business School is simply explained as the result of decision which rejected all applicants who attempted to access the information derive a conclusion which Dean Clark observed their belief, principles and it shows making own decisions is always with responsibility for actions. In addition, utilitarianism will be applied on this case because this theory is in contrast with egoism which can be defined by Shaw et al(2013, p. 63) as egoism contends that an act is morally right if and only if it best promotes an agent’s long term interest.’. It means self-interesting is most important key point whether going into action or not. However, Utilitarianism is focused on more about ‘achieving the

Sophisticated consequentialism is a hybrid, as it adopts the ideological tenants of both modalities of consequentialism and allows for the nuance of personal relationships to at times, override the adherence to a presumed action based upon the tenants of consequentialism. The sophisticated consequentialist may accept the reality that saving their one true love, is ideologically less beneficial than saving the three strangers, however the consequentialist would also take into the account of their personal feelings and the perceived total good that they may experience with that person over a lifetime as more beneficial than saving a higher quantity of strangers. At this, the sophisticated consequentialist is adopting the subjective consequentialist view of the intent to save one’s love, and experience more moments with them and bring about a higher amount of happiness than saving those three strangers. In this, I believe that sophisticated consequentialism is giving credence and importance to the personal point of view, as a textbook definition of a consequentialist theory would point to saving the

explains the consequentialist as the idea of looks to the consequence of an action in order to evaluate it. Even if the intention of the action is wrong or violent someone’s right, the its result for the general good is still the focus. In the other hand, deontological is more about the idea of only right or wrong. There is no intention or consequence, just with the moralistic ethics. One example of contrast he used in the book is the idea of utilitarian. Utilitarian can be express in the prospect of consequentialist ethics, because it will look at individual situation and create a decision that will benefit the greater people. However, the same situation in the idea of deontological

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 and non-consequentialism are both action based ethical frameworks that people can use to make ethical judgments. Consequentialism is based on examining the consequences of one’s actions as opposed to non-consequentialism which is focused on whether the act is right or wrong regardless of the outcome (Burgh, Field & Freakley, 2006). The three sub-categories of consequentialism are altruism, utilitarianism and egoism.

Consequentialism states that an act is moral if the consequence of the act will bring the greatest amount of good and immoral if the act will bring bad consequences.

(C) Agency is a person’s ability to make their own individual choices. Traits associated with agency include being: confident, aggressive dominant, forceful, ambitious intelligent. On the other hand, communal traits, which are traits that better the community versus better the individual, include being: helpful, sensitive, affectionate, caring, sympathetic and nurturing. According to the gender stereotype, agentic traits are associated with

Consequentialism refers to the idea that what is morally good or bad is all based on the consequences of one’s actions. It is derived from the Theory of Right Action which is a part of

Utilitarianism is a moral theory that seeks to define right and wrong actions based solely on the consequences they produce. By utilitarian standards, an act is determined to be right if and

Consequentialist moral theory is a branch of ethics which is centered around morality being the result of an outcome of a certain action. The consequence of an action is the premise which defines what is moral and what is immoral. The morality is found in two areas of goods, instrumental goods and intrinsic goods. Instrumental goods are goods that allow us to acquire other goods. Intrinsic goods are goods that have some form of worth in which we desire, but may not lead us to receiving or obtaining more of such goods.

Egoism: is a theory of ethics that focuses on achieving goals that benefit or brings pleasure or greatest good to oneself. In other words it focuses on self-interest, however egoism is opposite to Altruism, which is not strictly based on self-interest, but also includes the interest of others. There are two kinds of Egoism; Ethical Egoism, Psychological Egoism.

Consequentialism is a moral theory that claims that the wrongness of actions results in consequences (Baggini and Fosl, 56). It also is actions or rules that are right or wrong which depends on the result being a good or bad consequence.

The moral rightness and wrongness of an action is determined by how much happiness it produces in total.

Epicureanism came from Epicurean school and was founded by Epicurus. He adapted the Atomistic views of Democritus saying that happiness will only achieve through pleasure and it will be better to

Two examples or branches of consequentialism are egoism and utilitarianism. The definition of utilitarianism is simply, doing the most good for the most people. The definition of egoism is the habit of valuing everything only in reference to one's personal interest; selfishness. Egoism is simply about you and you’re self-interest compared to utilitarianism is looking at others interests. There are pros and cons to each branch; however I personally think egoism is the better model. Both represent or contain an aspect of ethics but, egoism I believe is reflected or more related to the average person in everyday life.