Paper Example on Mill's Theory of Utilitarianism

Introduction

Mill's theory of Utilitarianism states that one's actions are only right if they produce the greatest good. Actions have consequences or effects which may either be immediate or long-term. Before deciding on a particular plan of action, it is important to consider all the consequences involved. Consequentialism, an elemental part of the utilitarian principle states that the rightness of an action is determined by its effects or results (Mill). Even though this principle greatly focuses on the consequences of one's action, it also takes into account issues such as intention. The significance of these issues is however determined by degree or type of consequences which might occur as a result of one's actions. In my view, utilitarianism should be upheld in decision making processes since the principle takes into account every person's interests.

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

Save 25%

In the first rescue operation, Mill would advise the rescuer to rescue the five individuals who are immediately threatened by the ocean tide and forego rescuing the one person threatened by the other disaster. Looking at the situation from a utilitarian point of view reveals that rescuing the five individuals is what leads to the greatest good. The consequences of not attending to any of the individuals is death for six of them. The consequences of attending to one of them is the deaths of five of them while the consequences of attending to five of them is only one death. The rescuers will have a clearer conscience if they decide to rescue the five people as opposed to the one person. Rescuing the five people will also mean that there will only be one family which will be grieving the loss of their loved one. On the other hand, rescuing only one will force five families to grieve the deaths of their loved ones. The action of rescuing the five people takes care of everyone's action in line with the utilitarian principle.

Individuals have different moral principles which they live by. Most people are guided by the principle of respect for human life and helping others who may be in need. Therefore, in the first rescue operation, even though letting a person die may go against the rescuers morality, they would have to go against their moral principles since it is less significant in the given context. If the circumstances could allow, the rescuers would choose to recue both individuals since it is the action which would bring the greatest good to everyone affected by it. In the second rescue operation, Mill would advise the rescuer to drive over the one person in order to save the other five. Killing goes against the moral standards of various people. The second recue operation presents a more challenging scenario compared to the first one since it involves actively participating in the taking of a life which goes against many people's moral principles. However, the moral principles of the rescuers are less significance in this scenario as they are trumped by the consequences of not saving the other five individuals.

The principle of utility is greatly intertwined with utilitarianism. It advises that individuals should always consider other actions and determine if these other actions may result in greater pleasure or happiness. In the two rescue operations, deciding to save the greater number of people and letting one person die is the action which results to greater happiness. The rescuers may be pleased knowing that they would have saved the lives of the greatest number of people they could in light of their circumstances which may give them some peace of mind. In both situations, the rescuers have a choice to either save a lesser number of people or a greater number of people. J.S Mill's version of utilitarianism makes a great emphasis on happiness. Mill assumes that people do not only desire happiness for themselves but also for others. Naturally, human beings are inclined to help others who may be in need. This is because they desire to see happiness among everyone. Helping others and seeing them happy can make one happy too. Therefore, it may be argued that one's happiness is dependent on other people's happiness.

Kant's deontological theory places a greater emphasis on an individual's moral motivation or inclination compared to the consequences of one's actions. Unlike the Utilitarian principle, it does not take into account the feelings or happiness of other people. In the first rescue story, Kant would tell the rescuers to go on and save the five people who the rescuers had originally planned to go and rescue. From the story, it is apparent that the rescuers learn of the other one person's needs later on. This presents a problem to them since they do not possess the motivation to go and rescue this one person who they discovered on their way to saving the five people. According to Kant's deontological theory, the rescuers will be more motivated if they go and save the five people as compared to when they decide to save the one person. Saving the five is simply the morally right thing to do given the situation. If the situation would have been favorable, they would have taken a different path.

In the second rescue operation, Kant would advise the rescuer to rescue the one person they meet first along the way and forego saving the five others. In Kant's deontological theory, individuals are advised not to act against their natural inclinations. Many individuals are not naturally inclined to take a life and therefore they would not be morally motivated to run over an individual and cause his or her death. The deontological theory does not take into account the issue of universalizability. It only focuses on an individual's moral inclinations and what the individual considers as moral right and wrong. The first version of the Categorical Imperative that would apply in the first scenario is the requirement of respect for persons. The maxim would motivate the rescuers into focusing on rescuing the five people as opposed to the one person who also needs help. Rescuing the five people enables the rescuers to achieve the maxim to a greater extent as opposed to rescuing only one person.

In the second rescue operation, the maxim would be applied differently from the way it is applied in the first rescue operation. In this second scenario, the rescuers will be obliged to rescue the person on their way and forego rescuing the five others who need help. Because of the rescuers respect for life, they cannot run over the person simply because they need to go and save others. The second version of the Categorical Imperative also applies in the two situations. The maxim of universalizability would specifically come in handy. During the first rescue operation, the rescuers would be inclined to focus on saving the five individuals who need help as opposed to saving the one individual also in need of help. A majority of people would make such a decision given the circumstances. This makes the decision to save the five people have universalizability as compared to the other one. Similarly, in the second situation, the rescuers will be forced to save the one person they find on their way since many people lack the moral motivation to take the life of others. In the given scenario, their decision also has universalizability.

Conclusion

Mill's theory greatly focuses on the greater good at the expense of various other factors such as an individual's intentions. It dictates that individuals should go against their moral inclinations as long as it leads to the greater good. Going against one's moral inclinations can have devastating effects on a person's well-being. It interferes with a person's happiness which contradicts the underlying principles of utilitarianism. Many people have argued that the ends do not always justify the means. Kant's formulation in regards to the maxim of universalizability is highly problematic. While people's actions may be governed by various maxims, these maxims may or may not be willed to universal laws. Also, the moral worth of an individual's action should be determined by the person's actual motivation for carrying out the action and not on some conceivable motivation. I however believe Mill's ethical approach is superior since it takes into account the interests of every person. It also has a possibility to bring more happiness since it takes into account the needs of other people.

Work Cited

Mill, John S. "Utilitarianism - John Stuart Mill." YouTube, Then & Now, 30 May 2017, youtu.be/Dr9954kaFBs. Accessed 21 Sept. 2018.