1 Peter 2:25 Meaning, Religious Institutions Meaning, Penne Pasta With Meat Sauce Calories, G Minor Scale Chords, Insurance Icon Png, Lenovo C940 Yoga, Golf Ball Vector, " />
Nov 28

Utilitarianism also differs from ethical theories that make the rightness or wrongness of an action dependent upon the motive of the agent—for, according to the utilitarian, it is possible for the right thing to be done from a bad motive. Save 50% off a Britannica Premium subscription and gain access to exclusive content. Bentham’s theory Act Utilitarianism has many strengths and weaknesses. If the difference in the consequences of alternative actions is not great, some utilitarians would not regard the choice between them as a moral issue. That insight is that morally appropriatebehavior will not harm others, but instead increase happiness or‘utility.’ What is distinctive about utilitarianismis its approach in taking that insight and developing an account ofmoral evaluation and moral direction that expands on it. Utilitarians also assume that it is possible to compare the intrinsic values produced by two alternative actions and to estimate which would have better consequences. One of the leading utilitarians of the late 19th century, the Cambridge philosopher Henry Sidgwick, rejected such theories of motivation as well as Bentham’s theory of the meaning of moral terms and sought to support utilitarianism by showing that it follows from systematic reflection on the morality of “common sense.” Most of the requirements of commonsense morality, he argued, could be based upon utilitarian considerations. Utilitarianism is one of the best known and most influential moral theories. Some philosophers in the utilitarian tradition have recognized certain wholly nonhedonistic values without losing their utilitarian credentials. Black Friday Sale! Bentham believed that a hedonic calculus is theoretically possible. He was also quite an eccentric figure, who had relatively radical ideas for his time that have inspired many that came after him. As a normative system providing a standard by which an individual ought to act and by which the existing practices of society, including its moral code, ought to be evaluated and improved, utilitarianism cannot be verified or confirmed in the way in which a descriptive theory can, but it is not regarded by its exponents as simply arbitrary. To meet the objection to not permitting an occasional lie or theft, some philosophers have defended a modification labelled “rule” utilitarianism. Most opponents of utilitarianism have held that it has implications contrary to their moral intuitions—that considerations of utility, for example, might sometimes sanction the breaking of a promise. Some utilitarians, however, have sought to modify the utilitarian theory to accommodate the objections. Antecedents of utilitarianism among the ancients, Growth of classical English utilitarianism, Utilitarianism since the late 19th century, Effects of utilitarianism in other fields, https://www.britannica.com/topic/utilitarianism-philosophy, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy - The History of Utilitarianism. Although forms of utilitarianism have been put forward and debated since ancient times, the modern theory is most often associated with the British philosopher John Stuart Mill (1806- 1873) who developed the theory from a plain hedonistic version put forward by his mentor Jeremy Bentham (1748- 1832). But the utilitarian readily answers that the widespread practice of such acts would result in a loss of trustworthiness and security. More specifically, the only effects of actions that are relevant are the good and bad results that they produce. The consequences of the act of giving money to charity would be considered right in act-utilitarianism, because the money increases the happiness of many people, rather than just yourself. As most clearly stated by Mill, the basic principle of utilitarianism is: One such criticism is that, although the widespread practice of lying and stealing would have bad consequences, resulting in a loss of trustworthiness and security, it is not certain that an occasional lie to avoid embarrassment or an occasional theft from a rich person would not have good consequences and thus be permissible or even required by utilitarianism.

1 Peter 2:25 Meaning, Religious Institutions Meaning, Penne Pasta With Meat Sauce Calories, G Minor Scale Chords, Insurance Icon Png, Lenovo C940 Yoga, Golf Ball Vector,

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis

Comments are closed.