The And Critique Of The Theory Of Utilitarianism - 1706 Words

In this paper I am going to argue that telling a small lie that would cause no great harm to a friend in order to spare their feelings is an acceptable thing to do. I am going to examine this issue through the perspective of important philosophers Jeremy Bentham(Utilitarian), then through Immanuel Kant(Deontology). After talking about this issue through both of their perspectives, I will argue which person has a more defensible belief. Then I will talk about and critique Kant’s belief to tell the truth in this situation. Next, I will look at Bentham’s belief to tell the small lie along with my own and think of ways my argument can be contradicted and how those contradictions are wrong. Finally, I will end the paper by summing up all of my†¦show more content†¦Telling the lie creates the most happiness in this situation by not lowering it due to their not being any consequence, the lie does not cause any extra happiness, it only prevents any of it from being los t. If the lie resulted in causing more harm than the truth itself, Bentham would not tell the lie because he believes the moral thing to do is to maximize happiness and sometimes that means to choose to preserve the happiness there and not to lower it. The key to understanding why Bentham would tell the is to look at the consequence of the lie rather than the action of lying itself. The only result of the lie is that your friends feelings are not hurt which is why Bentham decides to tell the lie. I agree with Bentham’s belief to maximize happiness in this situation because telling the lie literally has no consequence, it only makes the friend happy by sparing his feelings. In this paragraph I stated what a Utilitarian believes, why they believe it, Bentham’s decision on telling the lie or not and why I agree with Bentham choosing to tell the lie. Now I am going to explain the beliefs of deontology and what one of the most important philosophers of it, Immanuel Kant, wo uld do in the situation of telling a small lie to a friend that would cause no great harm. Deontologists believe in duty based ethics that determine what is and isn’t moral. People have moral duties to do the right thing andShow MoreRelatedUtilitarianism, By John Stuart Mill1599 Words   |  7 PagesUtilitarianism is a doctrine in normative ethics that is outlined and defended by many philosophers, including the English philosopher John Stuart Mill as a standard to determine what are right and wrong actions. At its most basic claim, the right course of action one must take should be in the interest of maximizing what is known as utility. The right course of action is determined as being right if it maximizes the total benefit and happiness gained, while at the same time reducing the greatestRead MoreRetributivism Vs Utilitarian Theory1730 Words   |  7 Pagesmain points of discourse between the two major theories of justified punishment, which I will deconstruct. Feinberg asserts that there are two main theories used to justify punishment: Retributivism and Utilitarianism. These two theories supposedly oppose each other such that they are mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive (Feinberg). The latter of these theories, Utilitarianism, is the main concern of this paper. I will seek to examine the theory in greater detail by reviewing common criticismsRead MoreThe Ethical Theory Of Utilitarianism912 Words   |  4 PagesUtilitarianism is just one of many ethical theories used and studied in the world that we live in today. Many people would choose to disagree with the ideals that this theory embodies, but before someone chooses to disagree with it, they should know more about the theory instead of judging a book by its cover. In the theory of Utilitarianism, it is believed that an action that is morally right will bear the most favorable balance between good and bad, and that is when everyone’s interest is takenRead MoreUtilitarianism And Its Flaws Of John Stuart Mill s Defends Utilitarianism Essay1307 Words   |  6 Pagesa Global Perspective 7 December 2016 Utilitarianism and its Flaws John Stuart Mill’s defends utilitarianism, an ethical theory according to which, as he puts it, â€Å"actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness† (155 Ethics). In other words, actions are morally right if they make us happy and actions are morally wrong if they make us unhappy. Utilitarianism is an ethical theory in which an action is morally right if itRead MoreThe Moral Aspects Of Utilitarianism1619 Words   |  7 PagesBernard Arthur Owen Williams greatly influenced philosophical ethics through several studies on the moral aspects of Utilitarianism. His complex thinking and theories, along with his unique approach, gave him a great amount of recognition towards other theorists in his field. He expressed the majority of his beliefs through his writings in which he stressed his critiques of Utilitarianism and Kantianism and emphasized the importance of moral rational. His study of both exte rnal and internal reasoningRead MoreJohn Stuart Mill s Book, Utilitarianism870 Words   |  4 PagesIn John Stuart Mill’s book, Utilitarianism (1863) he challenges many critics that are against his theory. One of which is the claim that Utilitarianism is a swine doctrine. They interpret the theory by saying a humans ultimate goal in life, is that of a swine; pleasure in the absence of pain. It is quite an understandable remark, but definitely is an over analyzed critique, in my opinion. Mill however replies to the critics in grave detail, defending his theory. Although many strengths and weaknessesRead MoreUtilitarianism, By John Rawls And Robert Nozick1486 Words   |  6 PagesUtilitarianism is a moral theory according to which an action is right if and only if it conforms to the principle of utility. An action conforms to the principle of utility if and only if its performance will be more productive of pleasure or happiness, or more preventive of pain and happiness, than any alternative. The rightness of an action entirely depends on the value of its consequences, this is why the theory is described as consequentialist. The â€Å"separateness of persons† is an objection againstRead MoreEthical Ethics And Normative Ethics1078 Words   |  5 Pagescoincide with. I believe that individuals are granted the perception of free will under a higher authority, but there are overarching human rights that should be abided by. Normative ethics can be separated into two categories, utilitarianism and deontology. Utilitarianism can be defined by Jeremy Bentham in the book The Elements of Moral Philosophy as â€Å"morality, he urged, is not a matter of pleasing God, nor is it a matter of faithfulness to abstract rules. Morality is nothing more than the attemptRead MoreKant s Theory Of Moral Theory1466 Words   |  6 Pagestreatises, deontologists and utilitarians alike have argued over which moral theory is most coherent. Yet, in Mill s critique of Kant, Mill sidesteps this issue, not by directly critiquing Kant s moral theory, but rather by asserting that Kant s moral theory is actually just a form of utilitarianism. Essentially, Kant s universal law test is nothing more than a veiled appeal to consequences, as Mill correctly claims in his critique of Kant. After evaluating what it means to have goodwill in his GroundworkRead MoreRational Fools : A Critique Of The Behavioral Foundations Of Economic Theory1260 Words   |  6 PagesRational Fools: A Critique of the Behavioral Foundations of Economic Theory written by economist, Amartya Sen, takes a look at behavioral self-interest and its relation to behavioral economics. At the time that this paper was written, behavioral economics was becoming a popular area to explore and economists were trying to figure out how they could apply their research to encourage human flourishing. Sen begins this paper by critiquing the work of Edgeworth, who claimed that the 1st principle of