Utilitarianism – Morality Essay

The utilization of utilitarianism when creating moral decisions leads to a great injustice world, evaluate this kind of claim. The utilization of utilitarianism can be described as controversial subject for many people, some believe for it, it can provide happiness for the majority of world, others claim by using utilitarianism it can take aside peoples individual judgment producing our world unjust. Advantages of Bentham’s theory start out with the fact that utilitarianism gives a relatively uncomplicated method for choosing the morally right opportunity for any particular situation we might find ourselves in.

Utilitarianism treats everybody the same, no person gets unique treatment due to their emotional or social parts, and Bentham wanted all of us to shoot for happiness, his principle of utility states “the finest happiness intended for the greatest volume of people”. In order to make sure we stick to this assertion Bentham devised the hedonic calculus as a way of computing happiness; this name was chosen depending on its Ancient greek language meaning of “pleasure”.

For many individuals happiness is an important aspect of making decisions as it is all their main aim in life, the Hedonic calculus assists us in our moral decision making because it covers all the subjects that get handled in of joy for not one but almost all, the outcome is usually not prejudice and usually takes everyone’s emotions into account, by having happiness like a basis in back of how we help to make decisions that allows us to take up a flexible relativistic approach to every situation, targeting the greatest joy for the greatest number is discourages selfishness which then contributes to a better society due to everyone being reasonable and sensible. Mel Thompson agreed with Bentham, he said that Work utilitarianism appears to be simple to follow, merely aim to attain “the finest happiness intended for the greatest number”.

The positive and negative implications of our actions can be tested. This gives us an objective, 3rd party way of selecting what is proper and incorrect. Utilitarianism doesn’t rely on particular beliefs regarding God; this can be helpful to most religious persons and the growing number of atheists in our contemporary society.

Utilitarianism is straight forward and based on the principle of minimising pain and increasing pleasure and happiness, that take into account religion, meaning the outcome may be more fair, a lot of religious people have prejudices toward certain minorities meaning that girls or homosexuals may be victimised, people who are faith based may choose to take action because the holy book says it, for example the slave trade was in the bible, but if they’d used the hedonic calculus instead of the holy book then it wouldn’t of happened, furthermore is definitely would of lead to a just society, another model would be in the event someone was racist and was about to produce a decision about a black person using their brain then the result would be unjust, but if that they used the hedonic calculus it would result in justice for the reason that hedonic calculus does not take personal sights into account. You can also get many disadvantages to Bentham’s theory starting with the idea that some things are unpredictable and we should not base our ethical selections on something which may or may not happen.

Utilitarianism includes a different approach when it comes to rights, our normal idea of justice would relate with everyone getting treated reasonably, utilitarianism allows some people to be sacrificed pertaining to the greater very good, some people might argue that this kind of in unjust and brings about an unjust society. One of the main weaknesses of Bentham’s version of Utilitarianism is that you will find the potential to justify any act. This is because Bentham’s version relies, yes around the consequences of an action, yet on the satisfaction gained by an action.

For instance , if several men were walking down an street and stabbed a girl to death, then according to Bentham’s device ‘The Hedonic Calculus’ the quantity of the men’s pleasure would completely surpass the amount of the woman’s pain, and would therefore make the action of killing the ladies morally proper. If you eliminate rules and let people to tend to act in the greater great, they will truly act selfishly, and then try to warrant their actions by claiming they were in the greater very good, this would as well lead to an unjust society because people will and believe they were trying to follow the hedonic calculus. Think about someone murdered one healthier person and gave their particular organs to save 5 other folks.

The balance of happiness over harm helps doing this based on the hedonic calculus, but we know that it is not correct, Another disagreement against utilitarianism would be the idea of happiness and how it differs depending on the person, happiness is not the same for anyone, one person’s happiness could possibly be meaningless to a new, this defects utilitarianism due to the idea that this predicts that everyone’s notion of happiness is a same. Utilitarianism ignores the motives of actions, as long as the end excellent, sexually this can mean that immoral means could possibly be taken to attain pleasure, so long as the enjoyment outweighs virtually any pain. To conclude all the information implies that utilitarianism can help many persons in the scenarios they may face throughout their life, although altogether does lead to injustice with in world, this is because utilitarianism assumes you are able to know the certain answer to just about every decision is made, this would be not possible for any human being to achieve, the data leads to a conclusion that could justify bad acts, for example , if 8-10 prison protections find a impression of delight from beating the criminals, then their acts of evil will be overlooked if someone was basing their particular decision for the hedonic calculus because theoretically the pleasure of the guards will out way the prisoners.