Utilitarianism Is Fair Right Or Wrong

Decent Essays

R. M. Hare is a Professor at Oxford University that specializes on the topic of Moral Philosophy. Among his studies as a philosopher, he proclaims that moral philosophy depend on the meaning of philosophy itself. For instance, if philosophers have tried to clearly certain concepts presented in life so does moral philosophy. In other word moral philosophy is where "the problems on which it tries to shed lights are practically issued about morality". So philosophers would question the idea of what is "fair", "right or wrong" and so on.
Throughout the interview with R.M. Hare on the topic of moral philosophy with the interviewee Bryan Magee, Hare repeatedly goes back to the idea of utilitarianism and how the benefit of one thing should go to the …show more content…

Pacifism is when a person is not in favor of fighting, violence, and/or war. For example, if a group of bullies, let's say two to three, sees a person, that they know is a pacifist, and start throwing punches. The people will most certainly not stop pouncing the guy until they are satisfied. Additionally, Professor Hare claims that pacifism is unjustified, and as such they contain flues in them that makes them unjust. An example that was stated in the reading, regards the predicament of a pacifist during a state of war. In a state of war, usually the male adults would go to the battlefield, whereas the elders and females stay and contribute within factories, medical camps, etc. However, Hare believes that, for example, “If the American government, or anybody else, had a principle which required them to do that kind of thing, then this was an argument for abandoning the principle. And I think that they would have abandoned it if the had…” (P.139). Thus, Hare believe that such a principle is bound to end. As his example state that during a war that is when people’s duty as citizen comes to play, and in such a state people are bound to break their principle, such as pacifism, and follow their duty. Furthermore, Hare claims, on page 140, that the consequences of pacifism is that, “everybody in my position…have such a principle would be much worse that the consequence of having the principle which I do in fact have, which allows me to fight in certain war (P.140). So, in times of need, such a principle will end up misleading and at such principles as pacifism, people’s actions will be unjustified. Ultimately, the practice is not boundless to

Get Access