Abstract This paper examines how moral decisions in business are best served by adhering to the ethical code of ruleutilitarianism. Ruleutilitarianism provides a workable code for businesses, especially in the wake of the Enron and WorldCom financial scandals. It shows how, by adopting ruleutilitarianism, businesses can help to prevent serious damage caused by decisions based solely on the consequences of a single act and, instead, allow businesses to focus on ethical rules that ensure the best long-term benefit for society.
From the Paper "In essence, ultitarianism argues that an action is morally correct if the consequences of the action have a more favorable than unfavorable impact on everyone involved. Jeremy Bentham is commonly known as the father of utilitarianism, and perhaps known for his description of act utilitarianism. In act utilitarianism, it is morally wrong to commit any act that will result in consequences that are more negative than positive. However, act utilitarianism can lead to some serious moral quandaries, including a seeming over permissiveness of many seemingly morally abhorrent acts. For example, act utilitarianism would allow specific acts of torture to be morally acceptable if the specific outcome of these acts were more good than bad."
Abstract The paper first defines act- and rule-utilitarianism before discussing their relative merits. It moves through the debate using a series of famous examples and counter-examples designed to highlight the faults of each method. For example, the accusation of "rule-worshipping" is contrasted with the idea that act-utilitarianism allows people to break promises, or is too demanding. The paper ultimately finds that rule-utilitarianism is all too likely to slip into act-utilitarianism if it is to avoid potentially dangerous rule-worship.
From the Paper "The first principle of utilitarianism is acceptable enough, partly because Mill specifically spends much time discussing its proof in Utilitarianism, and partly because happiness as an ultimate end in life seems to the vast majority of people to be reasonable enough. However, there is great controversy between the opposing schools of utilitarianism about how exactly the individual utilitarian should make their moral decisions. The choice is between the principles of act-utilitarianism, which dictates that the rightness or wrongness of a single action is to be judged by the action's consequences, and those of rule-utilitarianism, which dictates that the action should be judged by a set of established rules, which are designed to produce the best consequences. It should also be noted that writers in both sides have cited passages in Mill's text which appear to support their point of view."
Abstract This paper examines how act utilitarianism is a direct moral theory and how the morally right action is the one that maximises happiness. In comparison, it looks at how ruleutilitarianism, while concerned with actions, is a more indirect theory in which the morally right action is not the one that necessarily maximises happiness in every situation. It considers whether John Mill is an act or ruleutilitarian, using Mill's idea of customary morality and evaluates which version of utilitarianism is more plausible.
From the Paper "Rule utilitarianism is not then very plausible as a form of utilitarianism, but it does at least offer answers to some of the problems with act utilitarianism. If one is to maximise happiness then in theory one has to calculate the welfare values associated with every potential action. This is obviously not realistic as one would have to spend a good deal of one's live calculating such values, which itself would surely not lead to happiness being maximised as these calculations themselves can not be described as particularly pleasurable. Indeed would someone really stand on the shore contemplating the consequences of saving a drowning man for more than a split second before acting?"
Abstract This paper explains that act utilitarianism involves independent acts; whereas, ruleutilitarianism involves the laws people observe while they act; act utilitarianism believes that people must do whichever action will cause the maximum good and the minimum ill; whereas, ruleutilitarianism believes that people must observe laws, which will cause the maximum good and the minimum ill for everybody involved. The author points out that act utilitarianismstates it would be ethically incorrect to fritter away hours on recreational pursuits like viewing television because it would be better spent on more societal welfare like philanthropic activities; however, banning recreational actions does not appear justifiable. The paper concludes that, hypothetically, the optimum purpose and law may be act utilitarianism; however, this might be idealistically insubstantial because any type of utilitarianism has to admit the inclination of the people to follow general laws.
From the Paper "As per act utilitarianism, it is the importance of the outcomes of the specific act that matters while resolving if the act is correct. Act utilitarianism asserts that acts are to be weighed as correct or erroneous only on the worth of integrity or immorality of their outcomes. While evaluating the integrity of the outcomes, the sole entity that counts is well being which causes somebody's living to progress smoothly for him or her. Well-being is the only entity that is excellent for its individual reason. Act utilitarianism also asserts that the appropriate act can be construed as such that generates the highest total of well being whilst evaluating without any prejudice intensifications and attenuation in the well being of every one impacted by the act."
This essay discusses how, in "Utilitarianism", John Stuart Mill states that, "In the golden rule of Jesus of Nazareth, we read the complete spirit of the ethics of utility".
1,650 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 2 sources, 2002, $ 62.95
Abstract This paper relates Mill's statement: "To do as one would be done by, and to love one's neighbor as oneself, constitute the ideal perfection of utilitarian morality." In this way, Mill succeeds in characterizing the spirit of utilitarianism as a moral theory. The author thinks that this is because it becomes in people's self-interest to be good to others.
A look at the British philosopher, Jeremy Bentham's famous work " Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation" in which he details his theory of Utilitarianism.
Abstract This paper discusses Bentham's views on natural rights and how at first sight Utilitarianism seems to be antithetical to the idea of basic rights and whether it justifies the deprivation of an individual's basic rights to serve the interests of the greatest numbers. It also explains how the theory of utilitarianism would justify respect for certain rights, and discuss the difference between rule-utilitarianism and act-utilitarianism.
From the Paper "Jeremy Bentham believed in applying empirical methods, rationalism and deductive arguments to the development of moral and legal theories. At the outset of his Principles of Morals and Legislation he has identified the basis of the principle of Utility on which the Utilitarianism has been founded?pain and pleasure, and calls them the two "sovereign masters" of mankind. The principle of utility, on which most of Bentham's work is based, has been explained by him as: ?Any action that promotes happiness of an individual or lessens pain is right while any action that increases pain or decreases happiness is wrong.? He further explains that the happiness of the individual is the same as the happiness of the community since the community is nothing but the sum total of individuals. Another key element in Bentham's theory of Utility is the concept of the happiness for the greatest number?and his belief that the happiness for the greatest number of people is quantifiable. He has also expanded his theory to include the acts of not only the individuals but that of the government as well, and because of his interest in law, the scope of his work included the legislative and judicial reforms."
Abstract This paper describes and discusses the concept of hedonistic act-utilitarianism. It discusses the importance of morality in society and how the theory of morality changes depending on how one defines one's social obligations. It then describes the utilitarian theory and how a Utilitarian may view an act. The paper goes on to discuss ruleutilitarianism and the various types of utilitarianism, such as hedonism and egoism. The paper concludes by exploring the concept of hedonistic act-utilitarianism and its applications.
Table of Contents:
Heroism and the Call to Duty
Utilitarianism and Justice
Hedonism and Egoism
What, Other Than Pleasure, Is Valuable?
Issues of Utilitarian Impartiality
From the Paper "According to Hurka and Copp (pp. 357-380) utilitarianisms affects the groups, more so than the individual. Therefore, the same dilution effect can be seen in the division of the greater social good. When one considers the group, everyone receives a smaller piece of the pie. The plausibility of hedonism in a utilitarian act depends on one's definition of pleasure and how the group dynamics work as far as spreading the rewards and punishments to their members. It is plausible to have hedonism and utilitarianism together. However, one must be careful to qualify their definitions. One can speak of the hedonistic acts of an individual or the hedonistic acts of a group. It is plausible for a group to have hedonistic act-utilitarian. However, this is more difficult for the individual because of the differences in perception. The answer to the question lies in which microscope one uses to examine the issue."
Abstract In this article, the merits and demerits of Utilitarianism are considered. The writer discusses Utilitarianism in light of James Rachels' essay, "The Elements of Moral Philosophy". Ultimately, the writer concludes by abondoning this theory for its inconsistency with liberty, justice and fairness.
From the Paper "'The Elements of Moral Philosophy' by James Rachels contains an exposition of Utilitarianism that considers the strengths and weaknesses of this unique moral philosophy. Like all ethical theories, Utilitarianism advances a conception of the Good that is expected to prevail. All action if it is to be considered moral or Right must conform to that ethical conception of the Good. In Utilitarianism the Good is happiness and action that produces the most happiness for the most people is Right action. Conversely, it is wrong to take any action ... "
Tags:utilitarianism, james rachels, moral philosophy, ethical theory, principle of utility
Abstract A comparison and contrast of the egoistic attitude with utilitarianism in this paper is revealing of the complexity of both approaches to ethical action, in that each is best considered a rubric or a category comprising a number of subsidiary positions. Thus for example ethical egoism has been cited as covering diverse approaches ranging from individual ethical egoism to universal ethical egoism. In this analysis, the paper shows that in order to present compare and contrast egoism and utilitarianism it is necessary to recognize both the complexity of each approach objections to each and the points at which the two approaches seem to overlap.
Abstract This paper responds to set questions on the defects of utilitarianism, as found in matters of constant sacrificial action, Utilitarian errors of justice, the greatest good rationale and all things to do with the ideal as opposed to the practicality of the philosophy. The paper notes a guiding social ethos, perhaps deduced to date in its promise of social improvability, in relation to rights.
From the Paper "A Critical Assessment of Utilitarianism Introduction John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism is most familiar to contemporary students of Philosophy and Political Science in his credo to do with the greatest good, for the greatest number, or societies that should be organized so that they can bring the greatest happiness to the greatest number. Mill's thinking has influenced the shape of contemporary liberal democracies in areas led by policies that should bring benefit to the greater part of a society, and classical liberal ideas of ensuring personal freedoms that can ensure happiness and remove future sources of contention."
Abstract This paper interprets the philosophy of utilitarianism as presented by J.S. Mills with a focus on Bentham and the arguments presented against it.
Abstract This paper takes an in-depth look at the exclusionary rule which states that any evidence that had been seized in violation of a person's fourth amendment right would be held inadmissible in any court . The paper begins with a historical look at the rule right up to the present day. It includes examples of nine United States Supreme Court cases that have made the exclusionary rule what it is today. The paper also includes information about the required procedures for initiating the exclusionary rule in court. Lastly, it includes the four main identifiable exceptions to the rule.
From the Paper "When the Court made this rule, they made it so that it only applied to federal officers as well as only federal criminal prosecutions. The problem with this decision is that it did not include State or Local officers and Courts; it only took into account federal officers and federal courts. Local and state officials were still able to seize items without going through the warrant requirement, and thereby bypassing our fourth amendment right altogether and the evidence would still be admissible. Also, local and state officials were illegally seizing items and turning them over to the federal police, who in turn were able to use the items in Court because they had not directly seized them; this act was known as the "Silver Platter" Doctrine."
This paper summarizes John Stuart Mill's pro stance of the death penalty by arguing that utilitarianism is a consequentialist ethical theory which concerns itself with maximizing human happiness.
Abstract This paper details the British utilitarian's opinions and views on errors made in capital punishment trials and the conviction of the innocent being irrevocable and unjust. It explains how Mill strongly argues that the gravity of the death penalty and the judicial system make it very unlikely that such errors will arise often, if at all.
From the Paper "If one takes care to incorporate Mill's strict criteria for administering capital punishment, his arguments are wholly in keeping with his own humane utilitarianism. Given a criminal who has unequivocally committed aggravated murder as a result of the criminal's disposition and who has no chance of social redemption, it follows that the sum of human happiness would be diminished were the criminal ever re-released into society. When violent criminals are among the innocent, the innocent have a tendency to live fearfully knowing that they may be victims of violent crime. If, as seems natural, fear is counter to human happiness, then this scenario decreases rather than increases that happiness."
Abstract This paper reviews John Stuart Mill's "Utilitarianism". The paper examines the social principle Mills wants to create. It also analyzes and critiques the main tenants of Mills' basic argument.
From the Paper "This research discusses utilitarianism, the philosophy of John Stuart Mill. It will present the main issues of Mill's argument and show what position he takes. It will also present his argument in support of his position. Then Mill's argument will be analyzed..."
Tags: John, Stuart, Mill, Utilitarianism, Virtue, Happiness, Good
Abstract This paper analyzes the Rule of Law. It review the concepts discussed in "The Problem of the Grudge Informer", by Lon Fuller. The paper discusses the hypothetical problem in the law that is clearly based on the real world experience of Germany under the Nazi regime. Fuller's problem essentially concerns the concept of the rule of law and how the law can be said to exist in a state in which a duly elected government willingly and successfully perverts justice for its own ends while all the while acting within the many of the technical parameters of the legal code of that specific state.
From the Paper "The Rule of Law and the Problem of the Grudge Informer In "The Problem of the Grudge Informer" Lon Fuller presents a hypothetical problem in the law that is clearly based on the real-world experience of Germany under the Nazi regime. Fuller's problem essentially concerns the concept of the "rule of law" and how the law can be said to exist in a state in which a duly elected government willingly and successfully perverts justice for its own ends while, all the while, acting within the many of the technical parameters of the legal code of that specific state. "
