Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

Human and Utilitarianism

Good Essays
1265 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Human and Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism

Let me begin by defining Utilitarianism: utilitarianism is the belief of doing what is right for the greater number of people. It is a theory used to determine the usefulness of the happiest outcome and how it will affect everyone else. Now, this sounds like a amazing theory, what would be better than making yourself and others happy? I found myself at first agreeing with this theory up until I really looked into it. At first I found myself thinking that not everything is about being happy; some may have to suffer for the happiness of others. For example, there were two boats one contains three criminals on death row being transported to prison and the other boat contains ten happy, loving families simply enjoying a vacation. Both ships have bombs that will go off in a matter of seconds, blowing up both ships and killing everyone. However, there is a solution. I for some odd reason have a device that sets off a bomb on ONE SHIP and deactivates the other. Now the morally right thing to do would be what? What is moral and right? Taking lives? Or saving them? I do not believe in ‘playing God’ or taking lives. I would simply ignore the Utilitarianism way of thinking and walk away. I would let nature take its course. If God has arranged this to happen, then it is meant to happen. Who am I to walk in and ‘play God’ ? I have to say I agree with Hospers when he says “A hundred men might gain great pleasure from beating up or killing just one Insignificant human being; but other men's lives are not theirs to dispose of.” (Hospers) A Utilitarian would approach this situation by asking himself/herself, what will bring happiness? What will do good for greater numbers of people? Why should the prisoners get to live? There are only three prisoners, and have done nothing good but cause harm to society. What have these families done? The Utilitarian will start to analyze each detail of the situation. They first see that there are only three prisoners as opposed to ten large families. Hence, there are less people on the prisoners boat. Then he/she will see that the prisoners have already been sentenced to death, all being on death row. However, the main point will be that these are three bad men. Doing bad things, and causing pain and sorrow to others. Why should ten happy families be punished for their wrong doings? The Utilitarian would settle for simply deactivating the bomb on the prisoners boat. Believing that killing them will bring greater good and happiness to all. My argument to this is a human life is a human life; what if one of those men are actually innocent and were convicted for a crime he didn’t commit? What if the other criminal was to be released in the morning and go home to a family of eight children and a loving wife? Truth is we don’t know.Utilitarianism fails to acknowledge that a life is a life- we are not suppose to be playing God. We don’t decide who lives and who dies, even if it is for the greater good. We should just let nature run its course.
Utilitarianism is a theory of always choosing pleasure over pain for the greater good of all. I believe that I have kept a closed mind towards Utilitarianism. The prisoners are already on death row, which means they are going to die for the evil they have set loose on our world. Why should I sacrifice the lives of innocent families, for a couple of men that have caused unhappiness to all? I want to reach happiness, as does everyone else in the world. I mean does the world function over what the greater good for all is? Is that why we have soldiers in Iraq sacrificing their lives for the greater good of America? Maybe I have just overlooked all the positive outcomes of Utilitarianism. I find myself agreeing with a lot of what it has to say. I want happiness, I want innocent lives to be saved, and I want to strive for the greater good of all.
I find it interesting how easy it is to fall into the comfort of Utilitarianism. It goes along with my morals and values and yet I still feel a sort of guilt. If I were to deactivate the bomb on the ship with the families and let the prisoners die, I would still be taking a human life. In my religion (Catholicism), a life is a life. We must forgive sinners and those who have sinned against us. But if these prisoners are on death row…were they already destined to die? Would that already be in God’s plan? Was it God who sacrificed his only son for all of us sinners? I feel in a way that makes God himself a follower of utilitarianism. He set the example of offering his only son for our sins, to open the gates of heaven for everyone. Yet one of the Ten Commandments is “Thou shall not kill.” Is that not hypocritical?
As I keep analyzing this situation I realize that God is God. He decides who lives and who dies, not us. I feel that it’s hard to stick to my morals when hearing the theory of Utilitarianism. Allowing someone to die at my hand for the greater good, for happiness of others. That just sounds selfish to me, kind of like the holocaust. Did all those innocent Jews endure experimentation and torture for the greater good of all? I mean, if it weren’t for these grotesque experiments we wouldn’t know the maximum altitude that crews in damaged planes can parachute safely to the ground or find the cure/treatment for hypothermia. The Jews were used as guinea pigs for the greater good of everyone else. Is that not Utilitarianism? So many people could have died of hypothermia if that experiment was never conducted. But how many innocent lives were lost to reach this conclusion? Is there a limit to how much sacrifice should be made for the greater good? There should be. This is where I cannot connect with Utilitarianism, the fact that some sort of evil has to be done to help others. I see hypocrisy in this theory; it wants happiness but wants to rule out evil. People are evil, mean and rude. No one can be happy all the time; no one can bring eternal happiness.
This takes me back to my original example, who would I save? The prisoners on death row or the innocent families? The Utilitarian’s seem to have a more interesting argument. Its funny how by writing this paper, my views changed. I look at the situation differently now. I do not feel as biased and conservative as before. My ideas have changed to a more liberal understanding sense. Why release these evil me back into the world? We have enough chaos and evil. These are just three men who chose their paths and now have to pay for it. They were sentenced to death for a reason, I will not be held responsible for the innocence of happy families, children, parents, aunts and uncles. They are not in prison because they have not done anything wrong. They simply stepped onto a ship, whose fate I now hold in my hands. I have made my choice; I will deactivate the bomb on the families boat and let the prisoners face death.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Simply put, Utilitarianism states that one should act on what would bring the greatest happiness or benefit to the greatest amount of people. Therefore, a utilitarian would agree to push two heaviest passengers overboard to save the six. While it violates our morals to kill two people, a utilitarian would explain their choice with the integrity objection. In the situation of the lifeboat, one is faced with a situation that does not present a perfect outcome. However, a utilitarian would say that we must choose the best outcome, which in the view of a utilitarian, would be throwing the two passengers overboard to save the other six.…

    • 300 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    A utilitarian would approach an ethical dilemma by identifying the alternative actions and their harms and/or benefits for all stakeholders.…

    • 285 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Utilitarianism or the greatest happiness principle, is mainly characterized by happiness and consequentialism. The measure of good and evil is balanced between individual 's happiness and the happiness of the community. (Sommers & Sommers, 2013) If you treat others how you wish to be treated, you are acting in the greater good for the most amounts of people, and in doing so, you are acting with morals. To act selfishly, you are acting morally wrong. This theory relies on producing the greatest amount of happiness. (Sommers & Sommers, 2013)…

    • 1183 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    In terms of utilitarianism, actions are evaluated by the outcome. What we should do is to maximize the good outcomes and minimize the bad outcomes. The most promising way of reaching the final decision is to choose the one that would bring about the greatest net benefits to everyone affected by the action once the harms had been taken into account.…

    • 492 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    I will first explicate on the theory of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a philosophical theory which states that that which is right is what brings the greatest amount of happiness to the greatest maximum number of people. The act that manages to fulfill this criteria is the act that is then morally right. As a result, whenever we consider what is a morally right action to do, we have to keep in mind that the action that would make it so that the accumulated level of happiness in the majority would be higher than the accumulated number of unhappiness in a majority. As well, utilitarianism is bias-free, in that the happiness levels of your close friends and family do not take priority over the happiness levels of the neighbors next door, or of people in countries that you have never visited and will never…

    • 1201 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In the article, “Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism”, Louis P. Pojman explained the grounds on which utilitarianism has been attacked and showed some possible response to its defenders which imply his positive attitude towards utilitarianism [1] . In order to argue that thesis, Pojman’s one important premise is the response to the no-rest objection. He believed that the agent should aim at maximizing his or her own happiness as well as other people’s happiness and is best not to worry much about the need of those not in our primary circle.[1] .…

    • 290 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Utilitarianism is an ethical philosophy which seeks to maximize well-being for the largest amount of people. This means that if you can secure pleasure at no moral cost, you should do so. It also means that if you can prevent displeasure for others without sacrificing anything of equal moral value, you should. In Utilitarianism the key is the well-being for the entire population.…

    • 443 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Utilitarianism claims that everyone shares a common intrinsic value of happiness and that because this is seen as the most important value in life, we should try to maximize…

    • 555 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Stuart Mill

    • 918 Words
    • 4 Pages

    John Stuart Mill defines utilitarianism as a theory based on the principle that “actions are right in proportions as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Sparknotes Editors). There are a few important aspects of this definition. It presents utility, the existence of pleasure and the absence of pain, as both the basis of everything that people desire, as the foundation of morality. This however, does not state that it is moral for people to pursue what makes them personally happy (Sparknotes Editors).…

    • 918 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    There are 2 main types of utilitarianism, the first I will talk about is Rule. Rule utilitarianism has certain principles involved with it, and from these, certain actions that we commit are able to be deemed as unacceptable. The principle of utility is therefore applied to a rule so the rule will stay if it leads to greater happiness for more people. This therefore means that if you do something bad that may lead to many people being happy, it could go against a rule or principle that has been set down in Rule…

    • 616 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Occupy Wall Street

    • 724 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Utilitarian is the moral doctrine that we should always act to produce the greatest possible balance of good over bad for everyone affected by our actions. The greatest happiness of all constitutes the standard that determines whether an action is right or wrong. Our belief that we are individuals and society is the net result of our choices. For example, the practice of blowing up rocks to release underground natural gas would not be permitted near residential areas if energy complaints…

    • 724 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Utilitarianism is a moral theory which centers on happiness and how we can promote it, and is measured by our actions. Utilitarianism explains how human’s ultimate goal is to achieve happiness. This is also called hedonism, limiting the amount of pain and equating happiness with pleasure. This theory explains how we aim for happiness through our actions.…

    • 1384 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Utilitarianism Is Wrong

    • 760 Words
    • 4 Pages

    First I would like to start off by defining what utilitarian mean well based off of the module a utilitarian is the person who believes in the greater good in other words a person who would take losses and justify it’s worth by the results gained from it. Now in regard to the question on how might utilitarian respond to the situation of the innocent man who was executed in order to keep the citizens from rioting. My answer to that is it would be the exact same result, because of how a utilitarian thinks. In situations like this I would guess that a utilitranian would not even hesitate to kill the innocent man, because a utilitrain would think that excuting the innocent man would be beneficial for the majority of the citizens so he would…

    • 760 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    California's Death Penalty

    • 1681 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Is it morally right to deliberately take the life of any person, even a person who has killed another?…

    • 1681 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Utilitarianism

    • 1415 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Utilitarianism is the view that an act is right if it equals the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Utilitarians describe moral actions as actions that boost something good and lessen something that is bad. Virtue, knowledge, and goodwill are all good but they are only good if they give people a pleasurable existence. Pain is the only thing that is intrinsically bad. Utilitarians focus on the result of an act instead of the inherent nature of the act. An example would be an individual throwing their garbage into the ocean. Utilitarians would say throwing garbage into the ocean is not necessarily bad, but the effect it leaves will cause harm sooner or later and that is what is bad. I do not think that utilitarianism can be an ethical theory. It is simply too difficult to determine whether the utilitarian theory can be justified. The dilemma of trying to focus on a positive outcome or focusing on the actions that we take in order to accomplish the greatest good is too hard to measure.…

    • 1415 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays