My initial thought was that more often than not, extremes are not the best option. However, the more of the article I read, the more I found myself favoring extreme utilitarianism.
I think most people subscribe to this kind of thinking when it comes to their individual actions, especially those actions that impact others around them. Generally, he argues consequences are not relevant at all when we are deciding what to do in a particular case. Smart, The example that resonated with me most strongly was the theoretical situation of saving a drowning man.
The best consequences are those which involve the maximization of what is good and the minimization of what is bad. The worst consequences are which involve the maximization of what is bad and the minimization of what is good. The basic premise is the idea that the greatest good comes from creating happiness for the greatest number of people.
The utilitarianism theory holds that an action is moral if it produces the greatest amount of good for the largest amount of people that are affected by the consequences of the action DeGeorge Jeremy Bentham believed that one should measure the intensity, duration, certainty, remoteness, or purity and their opposites when evaluating for each person that is affected DeGeorge For example, a consequence that gives a more desirable quality like pleasure would be favored, just like if one would receive a good immediately rather than at a later time, the sooner would be favored.
To know whether the action produces the absolute greatest good, one must compare it with alternative actions as well. To determine whether an action is moral or not, one should calculate the action and its opposite.
Although this passage is pretty straightforward I will explain it in simpler terms in order to better understand it. Basically, what Mill is proposing is that according to a Utilitarian, actions are unjustifiably right if they produce happiness, or pleasure, and have an absence of pain.
This is a key point into looking at the connection of utilitarianism and the liberty principle. Qualitative hedonists believe that there can be different levels of pleasure, meaning that some will be better than others. John Stuart Mill would be considered as a qualitative hedonist, which makes up part of his theory of Utilitarianism.
In order to determine what is happiness, Mill establishes his Greatest Happiness Principle, which introduces the adoption of Hedonism. Holmes' proposal is that of micro and macro ethics. Micro ethics regards the happiness of the individual as the highest good and defines what is right as the action that maximizes that end.
By definition, micro ethics is very similar to the belief of ethical egoism. On the other hand, macro ethics views happiness as the well-being of a group as a whole and defines what is right as the action that maximizes that end. As used here, a group can be those people of a specific city, state, nation, or race, and any particular group has "greater importance than any particular individual or subgroup within it, because its good exceeds the sum of any and all of its parts" Freeman Simply put, utilitarianism is the theory that an action is right, as long as it produces the greatest good for the most number of people Peetush.
The central point to this theory is that one must consider every consequence before taking any action. There are two classical forms of utilitarianism; rule utilitarianism and act utilitarianism. From a Structuralist outlook using binary opposites, Dickens highlights the battle between utilitarianism and individualism, similar to Atwood who, following a binary. One essential difference in the various approaches. Mill's own life, however, is marked with contradictions.
As Mill recounts in his Autobiography, his father had been part of the intellectual circle around Jeremy Bentham, the founding figure of Utilitarianism. In an effort to educate his young son according to the most useful precepts then available, John Stuart Mill as a child was essentially engineered by his father. This experiment in early child-training resulted in Mill being fluent in Latin and. Kant recognises that it. Whether we are sending e-mail, posting on message boards, or reading the news online, we are guaranteed the same freedom of self expression that we enjoy offline.
In other countries, the mere act of. Extreme Utilitarianism In J. Smarts theory of Extreme and Restricted Utilitarianism he argues that Restricted Utilitarianism, the idea that adoption of rules that maximize happiness and never breaking the rules is best for maximum utility, is irrational.
He argues that Extreme Utilitarianism , the idea that indeed rules are good but in some cases where action is required it is better to bend or even break the rules to maximize utility. I intend to argue this theory is incorrect.
0コメント