Philosophy’s “modern” concepts are only modern through words. Some of the most modern teachings are Utilitarianism and the improved Social Contract Theory. Both have a similar concept, yet the differences are what set them apart from each other. Utilitarianism was created by John Stuart Mill, and essentially it says that whatever action that produces the greatest amount of happiness for the majority is what people should do. On the other hand, the modern Social Contract Theory says that if everyone acts on the same accord, then a maximum amount of happiness can be met. Although both discuss happiness, the differences they hold separates the theories and what the theorists believe. One of the differences that separate Utilitarianism from the modern Social Contract Theory is a number of people affected. In the Social Contract Theory, everyone is affected because they all follow the same rules or guidelines to achieve a positive outcome. An example of such is in the …show more content…
According to the Social Contract Theory, there is no choice in decisions, it is all based on the laws or guidelines laid out in the contract. Basically, in the government scenario, citizens follow laws because they provide a sense of protection; though there is no official contract that is signed, the give-take relationship is what designates the actions of the citizens. Additionally, in the Utilitarian theory, the decisions are calculated, based on what is best for the majority. Here, there is no real thought into what should be done, but what is the best outcome. An example of this is if a lifeguard was tasked with the situation in which to save the President of the United States or a child from drowning, they would most likely choose the president so that the United States can continue to function as a country. While the child’s family would be sad in regards to the death the rest of the country would be grateful to still have their
Ethics can be defined as "the conscious reflection on our moral beliefs with the aim of improving, extending or refining those beliefs in some way." (Dodds, Lecture 2) Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism are two theories that attempt to answer the ethical nature of human beings. This paper will attempt to explain how and why Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism differ as well as discuss why I believe Kant's theory provides a more plausible account of ethics.
person cannot consent to the act such as making a false promise or deceiving someone.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory which acts as a guideline on how people should act in certain situations and was first introduced by a hedonist (pursuer of pleasure) named Jeremy Bentham who put forward the ‘Principle of Utility’ which said “The greatest happiness for the greatest number”. Utilitarianism is a theory which bases on the end purpose (teleological) of achieving pleasure, our decisions should be based on consequences in pursuit of the principle of utility (consequentialist) and is a theory which judges each situation independently (relativistic).
"The current federal system of government in the United States is failing to meet its social contract obligations to the American people." There is nothing closer to the truth than this statement. While some may argue that the government is following the guidelines of a social contract, many aspects of the government have outgrown their britches and taken over.
The most important question of all is what should one do since the ultimate purpose of answering questions is either to satisfy curiosity or to decide which action to take. Complicated analysis is often required to answer that question. Beyond ordinary analysis, one must also have a system of values, and the correct system of values is utilitarianism.
Opponents of Act Utilitarianism attempt to argue that Act Utilitarianism (henceforth AU) does not account for justice when applied to ethical dilemmas. It is the authors opinion that these claims are factually incorrect and this essay shall attempt to prove this through analysis of common arguments against AU, and modifying AU to allow for justice to be more readily accounted for.
Utilitarianism is a theory which states that an action that brings the most good to the majority of people is the only action that is morally just (114). Utilitarianism is an old theory which has developed over the years (Driver, 2014). The two most important philosophers that gave birth to this theory were Jeremy Bentham and John Mill (Ibid). These two philosophers, who lived in the 18th and the 19th century, believed that human beings should always try to do something that would be the most beneficial not to just yourself, but to as many people as you can (Ibid). The utilitarianism that these Bentham and Mill worked on is currently
The utilitarian faces many problems because he loses any ability to live a personal life. By this is meant that in making decisions the utilitarian must consider the steps which lead to the highest level of goodness in society. The utilitarian reaches for the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Two main aspects dominate the light of utilitarian beliefs. The consequentialist principle explains that in determining the rightness or wrongness of an act one must examine the results that will follow. The utility principle is that you can only deem something to be good if it in itself will bring upon a specific desired state, such as happiness or fulfillment. There are two types of utilitarians: Act utilitarians and Rule
Social contract denotes that a government or sovereign body exists only to serve the will of the people because the people are the source of political power that is enjoyed by the entity. The people can choose to give or withdraw the power. Not all philosophers agree that the social contract creates rights and obligations; on the contrary, some believe that the social contract imposes restrictions that restrict a person’s natural rights. Individuals who live within the society gain protection by the government from others who may pursue to cause them injury, in exchange, the citizens, must relinquish individual liberties like the capability to commit wrongdoings without being reprimanded, and they should contribute to making society
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
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.
The quality of your individual life would greatly improve in utopia. The burdens you face from corporate monopolies, the overwhelming weight of the devaluation of your currency and the lack of faith in your neighbors to achieve a civilization of peace and mutual respect has taken its toll for too long. Although this sounds as if it was taken directly from George Orwell’s book (1984) itself, the propaganda of a utopian government rule and the current everlasting war breathes as it’s on self-reliant organization today. Weary of the multiple political parties that are emerging every three seconds, we are faced with a question that has been proposed since the beginning of logical thinking. Is it
Utilitarianism is the argument that all actions must be made for the greatest happiness for the greater number of people (Bentham, 42). However, utilitarianism cannot always be the basis of one’s decisions due to the fact that people need to look out for their own pain and pleasure before consulting others’ wellbeing. I will first explain the arguments of the utilitarianism ideal. Then I willl explain why this argument is unconvincing. Ultimately, I will then prove why people consider their own happiness before considering others. Thus showing the utilitarianism view is implausible due to the need for people to consider their own happiness when making decisions or else they themselves will be experiencing the most pain and unhappiness.
Rousseau's principal aim in writing The Social Contract is to determine how freedom may be possible in civil society, and we might do well to pause briefly and understand what he means by "freedom." In the state of nature we enjoy the physical freedom of having no restraints on our behavior. By entering into the social contract, we place restraints on our behavior, which make it possible to live in a community. By giving up our physical freedom, however, we gain the civil freedom of being able to think rationally. We can put a check on our impulses and desires, and thus learn to think morally. The term "morality" only has significance within the confines of civil
On the formation of the Social Contract Theory has a long history, many people have formed Social Contract Theory has made a great contribution. Thomas Hobbes as one of the representatives of Modern Social Contract Theory, his departure from the theory of human nature, to a fictional state of nature as a starting point, put forward the basic principles of natural law, natural rights, and then through the Social Contract Theory, the establishment of his country theory. Thomas Hobbes certain extent, played a significant role, for people to bring enlightenment. But his theory does not apply in all cases; we need to analyze different aspects of different problems. In this essay, I will describe the Social Contract Theory, and explain the problem of how do we get out of the State of Nature raised by Hobbes Game. I explain the idea of cooperation that Thomas Hobbes can give to this problem, and then argue that this is not a satisfactory response to the problem for three reasons.