Essay on Utilitarianism: Strengths and Weaknesses

Introduction

Ross believes that people don't undertake tasks simply because they know the consequences. Instead, they make a promise to themselves that they will do so. This theory suggests that we are innately able to discern right and wrong, so it is easy to see if there is a right or wrong action. Although it is difficult for humans to understand why an act is right, they can tell the difference between good and bad.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Moral senses are born and cannot be altered by the environment. This theory is in contradiction to relativism theory, which states that moral senses do not come from birth. Instead, they are shaped by the environment. Ross argues that utilitarianism implies that an act's moral value is determined by its benefits. Ross argues that this is why people choose actions that bring them happiness (Ross & Stratton-Lake 2-6).

Strengths of Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism is a logic position that can be applied to everyday life. Because its principles are universally applicable, it is the basis of modern society.

Utilitarians tried to find a way to settle for an objective way to improve the welfare of people by giving them the skills to discern what is of benefit and what is not. This theory is often called "the supreme happiness hypothesis". It is an empirical method for calculating happiness. It is the goal of happiness to make you feel happy.

If a person is happy about the act, we can confidently conclude that it was good. We conclude that the act is not successful if it does not bring us satisfaction. This theory provides a way to measure whether an act is good or not. You can also use the theory to determine the degree or extent of goodness. This can be done by using words like satisfied, very satisfied or not satisfied.

This theory focuses on benevolence and aims to promote the idea of happiness for all people. If it increases happiness, then something is considered good. This theory stresses the importance of taking actions that can bring happiness to the highest degree (Mill 23).

People are not always sure what the consequences will be of their actions, but they need to weigh all options and choose those that make them feel successful. People are motivated by the good things in their lives, and not just to take risks. This theory examines the results of an action. Fortunately, most people can judge the usefulness of an action simply by looking at its end result.

This theory is useful because its basic principles can be applied to society. Motivation theory advocates that when we feel reinforced after completing an action, we have the potential to take on more actions as we hope to be reinforced again. We may feel discouraged if we don't achieve good results. This theory is similar to the one above. Good outcomes indicate that something was done well or that it was good.

Mill believes that justice and rights are key determinants of happiness around the world. (Mill 34). The world would be a better place if all people's rights were respected. People would feel happier if they could exercise their freedom without fear. This means that people would have to be held accountable for their actions.

The world would be a better place if it was free. Thucydides is an ancient Greek historian and author who stated that freedom ..." is the key to happiness. Bertrand Russell, an English logician, philosopher and logician, said that freedom can be described as "the absence of obstacles to realizing one's desires". This generally supports the idea that freedom makes it easy to be happy and does what is right and most beneficial to one (Miller and Williams 26). Happiness in the world is determined by justice and freedom.

Simplicity is also a strength of this theory (Ross & Stratton-Lake 217). It is a good starting point to formulate policy decisions. It is also helpful when it comes time to make laws that address ethics. This theory is best illustrated by the 1967 abortion act.

It is easy to grasp the theory and does not require you to look for additional information. It's realistic when it comes down to right and wrong. It's also easy because it provides a solid foundation for the above actions to be executed with ease. This is a key characteristic of a good theory, as they are designed to be easily applied in everyday life.

Weaknesses in Utilitarianism

This theory is often criticized for being subjective, since it holds that standard moral values should be maintained. This theory disregards morals that benefit the majority. It supports only the things it believes will bring happiness to a small percentage of the population. While some things may not be beneficial to the minority, the majority could reap the benefits (Miller 111).

One person's benefit may not have the same effects on another. This theory holds that if an action makes us happy, it's right. This theory will make me and my business partner happy if we kill our competitor. We can then reap maximum profits. Is this a justified act? Is this right? This theory is true because it makes us happy when our business succeeds.

These moral standards may be viewed as basic human rights or godly and should be respected and maintained. It is not always true, as not everyone derives joy from meeting the moral standards. Miller, 212. This is a misperception as these standards are not universally applicable.

The fact that these values can vary from one society to the next is a reason for the theory to be challenged. One society's view of God or basic human rights may differ from another. These principles can be adapted to different cultural beliefs and values, so they are not always the same.

It is unjustified to assume that all things are morally good. We consider this assumption to be false because the proponents have not provided any evidence. This assumption might be valid in certain cases but it may not apply in all cases. While good is often defined as something that is pleasurable, it might not be applicable to all people. Every person has their own preferences, which means that different things can make people happy. It is wrong for people to believe that just because something has positive results, it will give them satisfaction.

This theory is controversial because it allows for evil and socially unacceptable actions to be classified as good, provided they are carried out by the majority. This is known as swine ethics. Mob justice, which is supported by the majority of people, could be considered a good vice.

This makes the theory seem unrealistic as some things can be considered good and others not. The majority of western countries supported colonialism and they were able, through their colonies, to accumulate a lot of wealth. This theory said that it was good. Because they were colonizers, the colonies suffered oppression and were denied their rights. A majority of people support an action but it does not make it good.

People don't always support what is right. In fact, people love to take shortcuts to get where they want to go even if the path chosen does not conform to morality. This theory supports injustice by making people or groups of people scapegoats in order to make others happy. This theory can be used to defend extremists like Hitler, who claim that they are being inhuman to maximize happiness.

Others criticize the theory for being too personal. The theory ignores some people's rights in an effort to promote good. This is because the majority may not support the minority's wishes and their rights may be violated in certain instances (Mill 101).

The majority of people support an act and it is difficult for the minority to defend their rights. It is impersonal in the sense that it ignores the rights and tries to solve the problem for some people. It lacks integrity because it does not consider morality and what integrity entails, which is holding onto what one believes to right and true.

It is absurd to think that you can know whether an act is good or not without knowing why. We give reasons why a person is good when we say they are good. Same applies to values. There must be a reason why a particular act is good or bad.

If a group of people was asked whether killing is wrong, they would not all simply answer that it is because they are taught that way since birth. Some will explain it with religious beliefs, others will say it depends on the circumstances, while others will use their beliefs and decide if it's good or bad (Miller 167).

Conclusion

Utilitarianism theory states that the best things bring maximum happiness to humans. There are both strengths and flaws to this theory. Because the theory doesn't account for all the things, the weaknesses tend to be more important than the strengths. This leaves many unanswered questions.

Works Cited

Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism: Easyread Large Edition. California: ReadHowYouWant.com, 2006. 164 pgs

Miller, Harlan and Williams, Hatton. The Limits of utilitarianism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999. 315 pgs

Ross, William David, and Stratton-Lake, Philip. The right and the good. Chicago: Oxford University Press, 2002. 183 pgs