The Cost of Fighting for Social Justice and the Common Good

Far too often, humans don’t consider the consequences of their actions, and whether this is due to the fact that we have power or wealth or we simply just don’t care, because we’re determined to get something done, we as a species should always consider what the outcome of our actions are going to be. Perhaps if we did so more often, we would have the problems that we’ve accumulated over the years, like deforestation and pollution. So, as humans progress further, there is one important question that we must ask ourselves, is our determination in doing something justified, and will our actions have a positive

What if the right action doesn't benefit our interests in any way? Another objection against Mill's reply says that utilitarianism is too demanding because we should maximize overall happiness regardless of our interests. Mill replies to this saying that unless it's a great contribution to society, our self interests are weighted more. So only in very rare cases would we have to give up our self interests to make the choice right. I also agree with this reply because our self interests should definitely weigh more than the happiness of a few people, after all as humans we are very selfish in general. However if it is on a large-scale such as helping a big community in a great way without taking a lot of time, we need to consider what we are giving up and put our interests aside in order to contribute for the greater good as long as it is not too demanding.

Everyone has a dream or something they want to follow in life. Some want material gain while others want to help as many people as they can. I’m not saying wanting material gain is a bad thing, but what I am saying is that for me, money is not the number one concern when my dream is to help others. My hunger to help others only grows by the day. Because of what’s going on in the world we live in today, I believe that it is important that those who are less fortunate than others have the assistance they need to get to an even playing field, health-wise, with others.

In sum, life is supposed to be about more than happiness. We are supposed to do something important, adhere to some ethic, and serve a greater good. We live for a goal, a principle, or a destiny—not just for pleasure.1

In a society where the concept of ‘self’ is removed and ‘selflessness’ is the moral good, the pursuit and attainment of personal happiness is evil. Individuals seeking happiness live a tortured existence; filled with persecution and guilt. “We, Equality 7-2521, were not happy in those years in the Home of the Students. It was not that the learning was too hard for us. It was that the learning was too easy. This is a great sin, to be born with a head which is too quick. It is not good to be different from our brothers, but it is evil to be superior to them. The Teachers told us so, and they frowned when they looked upon us.” (Rand 4) Equality 7-2521 struggles with the fact that he has attributes that set him aside from the rest of the collective. In a society of equals, there

Hook. Both John Stuart Mill and Peter Singer approach moral philosophy from a utilitarian perspective. In this paper, I will argue that Singer’s and Mill’s utilitarian philosophies share numerous similarities but also differ. Singer and Mill agree on the importance of selflessness, the idea that we can end human suffering, and the significance of consequences. However, their views conflict concerning the relevance of motivation. I contend that Singer improves upon Mill’s utilitarianism since Singer accurately recognizes the discrepancy between a life of absolute affluence and absolute poverty and also wrestles with the intricate concept of motive.

duty, but in one's best interest; "is indeed a duty so essential to the peace and happiness of the

Classical utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory which holds that an action can only be considered as morally right where its consequences bring about the greatest amount of good to the greatest number (where 'good' is equal to pleasure minus pain). Likewise, an action is morally wrong where it fails to maximise good. Since it was first articulated in the late 19th Century by the likes of Jeremy Bentham and later John Stewart Mill, the classical approach to utilitarianism has since become the basis for many other consequentialist theories such as rule-utilitarianism and act-utilitarianism upon which this essay will focus (Driver, 2009). Though birthed from the same

May we ever choose The harder right, instead of The easier wrong.”-Thomas s. Monson. Sometimes good intentions follow decisions that may not be the wisest, but they can strengthen or weaken you. We are faced with numerous challenges in life where we may have to bring about sacrifices to save the ones we care for. If you're poor and your child is starving to death, you will do everything in your power to accomplish your child going to bed with a full stomach. Even if it means you have to do something rash. Greed,temptation,death and love make us do deranged things. It is ok to get arrested for being an ignorant kid that steals shoes because they were dared to, but it is not acceptable to arrest a mother for stealing food for her newborn so

Over the course of history, people have sacrificed themselves for a greater purpose, which offered them no personal gain other than the fact that they did the right thing to improve the world around them. In his "The Future of

Everything has a price. Which is okay as long as the price is worth the results. In the past terrible things have happened under men claiming, “The ends justify the means.” Then history repeats itself and another horror occurs with the same tale from those responsible. A question, naturally, is asked in these scenarios. Do the ends justify the means? Eric Sevareid and Charles Percy Snow lived through both World Wars and have seen a lot of scientific progress change mankind. Sevareid looks at the world in a pessimistic manner, but Snow would disagree. While both agree there can be a cost to progress, Snow believes in the future of man, while Sevareid only sees darkness.

Utilitarianism is a practical doctrine that is widely accepted in modern society’s economics, politic, and ethics. Utilitarian is driven by the pursuit of happiness. For a utilitarian, everything that will be helpful in the pursuit is considered good. In utilitarianism, an action is good or evil based on its consequences on the happiness of an individual and the happiness of the community. Similar to other doctrine, utilitarianism is not without a flaw. Bernard Williams, in his paper Utilitarianism and Integrity, voices his primary concern in regard to utilitarianism by providing two concrete examples to demonstrate how utilitarianism is only concerned about the consequences of the action and not about the means used to get there. Williams argues that utilitarianism fails to acknowledge the integrity of a person because the ultimate goal of utilitarianism is to produce the greatest happiness overall.

Sheehy, Paul. "Doing the Right Thing (Part II): Challenges to Utilitarianism." The Richmond Journal of Philosophy. Richmond Journal, Mar. 2008.

Striving for happiness is truly the only thing that matters just like Malcolm X, during the 1960s, when he was a member of the civil rights movement; he fought for human rights, a possession, which filled african americans, across the nation, with joy and admiration. Sadly, he was assassinated in the middle of a speech, and never saw his dream come true, but his intentions were clear. He wanted African americans to stop suffering, by helping them obtain civil rights in order for them and him to be

In the book, “The Element of Moral Philosophy”, James Rachels explores the several criticisms of Utilitarianism. In this essay, I will touch on these criticisms, outlining the major implications they propose to Utilitarianism. I will also explain why many of the notions proposed against Utilitarianism are self-serving, and instead serve to improve the general good of a minority population, which contradicts the Utilitarian theory of equating moral aptitude to the general good of a majority population, and that in this respect a greater consequence is achieved. Lastly, I will demonstrate how many societal values have a Utilitarian basis, which proves that Utilitarianism can be salvaged in the face of most criticisms.