The Is The Choice For The Welfare Of All

The dictator may do what he/she wants without anyone stopping them. According to “Kidzwiki,” “Dictators will normally rewrite an existing constitution ( a constitution is a document that embodies the fundamental laws and principles) or put in place a completely new one.” They do this so they can rule the country their own way without anyone second optioning his/her decisions. According to the text, “Dictators must often use force to maintain their power” ( World Books). They do this so they will make the people approve of him/her by taking out the country’s enemy and then the dictator will control the country his/her own way. Therefore, the dictator has full control of the country they rule.

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.

In Republic II, Glaucon and Socrates pose the question of whether justice is intrinsically good, or instrumentally good. Further, the two men wish to discover which life is best - the just life or the unjust one. While Glaucon argues that the unjust life is best, Socrates argues that the just life is truly better. In this paper, I will summarize both Glaucon’s and Socrates’ arguments, and provide a critical analysis of the opposing views.

Which is why dictators usually reserve the right of overriding their parliaments, government and courts even though they designate power for most situations. It's also why dictatorships are far more efficient in crisis situations i.e. war, then democracies. (Separation of Powers)

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

According to Socrates, when democracy has an excessive freedom with its citizens, tyranny is inevitably present. Since the young man who was educated by “thrifty parents who preferred wealth-seeking desires” (572 c). Despised what had to do With the proper education of the individual and the healthy fun, however, when this young man grows up he finds friends who influence negatively inculcating values away from the family, then this young man already become a man begins to fall into excesses, vices, and corruption. For this very reason, the young tyrant, seeing that these two forces,

Humans cannot always be expected to follow their conscience completely; if they did, they would be perfect. Perfection is, in my opinion, contrary to the basic characteristics of humanity. Paine also asserts that “the strength of one man is so unequal to his wants” that humanity must rely on others, such as those within the necessary evil of government, to accomplish goals (1). These new insights helped me realize the link between the ‘big’ ideas of government and revolution and individual human nature, deepening my understanding and appreciation of Common

Mankind is no stranger to the themes of power and tyranny. The two terms go hand in hand - for the definition of tyranny is “the government or rule of a tyrant or absolute ruler.” Tyranny is, by no means, meant to be a positive thing. Just going through history, one can find tyranny scattered all about. Take Adolf Hitler, for example, who corrupted his power in order to bring about the deaths of millions of innocent people.

After a storm there is a calm. After the night there is a morning, and after an end there is a new beginning. There is always going to be cause and effect in this world. One thing happens, either good or bad, and there is a reaction, a side effect. The essay is addressing the world-wide issue that connects democracy and simple real-world problems.

John Stuart Mill introduces his assessment of Utilitarianism by stating how a standardized system in which people’s actions may be judged to differentiate between right and wrong has been minimal in progress. He expresses the misconception with the way utility is understood by the general populous and other philosophers. The struggle to lay the foundations in what constitutes as right and wrong dates longer back than 2000 years ago.

This ethical system is different from both the Utilitarian of Mill and the Categorical Imperative of Kant. The principle of utilitarianism holds the belief in the greatest happiness of the greatest number. Mill equates happiness with pleasure, while pleasures are of higher and lower value. Pleasures of mind are higher than the pleasures of body. For instance, pleasure of learning is more valuable than pleasures of eating and drinking. The decision on value of pleasure rests on the consensus of experienced observers. The moral foundation of utilitarianism rests on the principle of “greatest happiness of the greatest number” where happiness of every sentient being counts equally. The ethical system as proposed in this paper draws from the unique human capacity of love

‘The Republic’ is a Socratic dialogue written by Plato around 380 BC, concerning about the order of justice, the order and character of just men and just city/states. The Republic is considered as the best known work of Plato and is considered one of the world’s most influential works of politics, history and philosophy. In this Socratic dialogue, Socrates discusses about the notions of justice and whether the just man is very happy when compared with his unjust, Athenian and foreign counterparts. Socrates considers the various facets of the existing regimes and proposes a series of hypothetical cities that are entirely different from his considerations. Such heated discussions result in the culmination of discussing kallipolis, a hypothetical city-state that was ruled by a philosopher king. In this paper, we are going to consider Socrates arguments about democracy by examining whether the concept of democracy always remains inconsistent with philosophical goals.

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.

Numerous moral theories have surfaced in the past years. They have been widely debated by philosophers and social reformers. It is important to understand what these theories are because of their influential tendencies in the way people act, especially in making morally right or wrong decisions. Utilitarianism is one of these many moral theories. Upon further analysis, problems with utilitarian thoughts are revealed. It has been widely debated by many philosophers, including G.E. Moore and Immanuel Kant. Like these two philosophers, I argue that utilitarianism is inadequate because of its contradictory nature as a moral theory. It highlights the principle of utility in seeking the greatest pleasure, allowing egotistic and hedonistic actions to be considered moral.

Utilitarianism may have its strengths in the sense that it is considering consequences of each situation and making a decision that is most beneficial to the majority. It is based on consequences, as outlined in HDM (p.69), every situation will be different entailing different facts, which will determine the best situation. By measuring the consequences, the most beneficial outcome can be identified. No act can be entirely right or wrong. The idea of democracy also in HDM (p.69), is a good use of utilitarianism, society will choose who they find most suitable to decide for the city, province, or country. Subsequently, maximizing the good for all. This ethical theory can promote happiness, by deciding what is going to be most beneficial and weighing your options, one can choose what makes them most happy and is suitable to their situation.