Flaws with utilitarianism

Today's post provides an example of this method in use. In this example, the methodology outlined in last week's post is used to simulate a phenomenological research project PhRP. The subject of this simulation is finding a reasonable foundation for ethics that is based on objective and intersubjective evidence.

Flaws with utilitarianism

Morality Morality was unfortunately not defined. Morality has different meanings to different people and what is or is not moral is defined differently by various personal beliefs and asserting something to be moral or immoral quickly becomes subject to our respective biases.

A steady-state economy is an economy made up of a constant stock of physical wealth (capital) and a constant population size. In effect, such an economy does not grow in the course of time. The term usually refers to the national economy of a particular country, but it is also applicable to the economic system of a city, a region, or the entire world. Flaws with utilitarianism Essays: Over , Flaws with utilitarianism Essays, Flaws with utilitarianism Term Papers, Flaws with utilitarianism Research Paper, Book Reports. ESSAYS, term and research papers available for UNLIMITED access. Act and Rule Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is one of the best known and most influential moral theories. Like other forms of consequentialism, its core idea is that whether actions are morally right or wrong depends on their rutadeltambor.com specifically, the only effects of actions that are relevant are the good and bad results that they produce.

However my position as a utilitarian is Flaws with utilitarianism to debate morality of certain actions but the overall balance of happiness and unhappiness resulting from the said action. Even if say the interrogator was a sadist and actually enjoyed the act of torturing the child to illicit compliance from the terrorist, the pain inflicted upon the two is justified by preventing the deaths of hundreds of Flaws with utilitarianism and the resulting pain to every one of their family members for their losses, many whom would also be fathers, mothers, sons, daughters and children.

Thus in this scenario the action of torturing a child while distasteful and immoral to most if not everyonel, has created the best possible outcome of reducing overall pain.

I would reference happiness as defined by this challenge… Happiness: Now my opponent made another argument in regards to what is and not is moral and that the overall good result must be moral to utilitarians while I disagree because I reject morality, I do not wish to dismiss it despite my own views so I shall address his view of morality as well, if he believes that anything justified should be moral then I would conclude that by his views and deferring to this scenario that Torturing a child in this scenario was moral because it saved many more lives and prevented much pain.

Flaws with utilitarianism

My friend could have done any number of things to prevent the result like simply watching where he was going, blaming me for something so petty could result in a loss of friendship and greater pain while accepting responsibility and maintaining the friendship would likely result in greater happiness, and less pain of injuries down the road by learning from his mistake.

Overall accepting responsibility eventually leads to learning and indepedence which both contribute to happiness, so I refute the notion that utilitarianism leads to Non-responsibility.

The problem of the subjectivity of values Here my opponent seems to propose that happiness is not the goal of every person and thus utilitarianism does not serve their interests. Monks and hermits are used as an example of people who seek righteousness through toil and labor or perhaps some form of abstinence, some monks believe that by abstaining from worldly pleasures they can achieve a higher form of enlightenment in the afterlife, I never viewed these people as adverse to happiness but rather people who derived satisfaction from their journey to enlightenment or the desire to be happy in the afterlife by achieving enlightenment, and hermits are generally content or prefer to live alone.

Once again deferring to the given definition of happiness… Happiness: I would assert that people seek their own happiness even if it seems like an unhappy existence by our personal standards.

The problem of infinite consequences and impossible calculations In this argument my opponent asserts that utilitarianism is impractical due to our lack of ability in predicting every possible outcome for the ultimate balance of happiness over unhappiness.

Utilitarianism is much the same, we may not always achieve the perfect outcome, but overall analyzing situations to the best of our ability for the purpose of maximizing happiness is a more practical approach to the betterment of society, certainly better than just rolling the dice or going with our gut feelings of morality.

I would however point out that losing ownership of oneself contributes to unhappiness as well and must be taken into consideration in balancing happiness. Clearly this bad motive has resulted in a positive effect.

Now lets go back in time and for purpose of this argument lets say we knew exactly how the events were going to unfold just as the second hitman passes by, a person subscribing to the motive philosophy would be morally inclined to stop the act, thus allowing the first hitman to kill the victim.

A utilitarian on the other hand would permit the hitman to perform his evil deed knowing it would result in sparing the target, killing one criminal and busting the other, achieving the best possible result. Report this Argument Pro My opponent is free to argue what morality implies if it corresponds with the definition of utilitarianism.

This entails objective moral obligations, for for every objective moral basis there is a system pertaining to ought and obligation. In fact, I believe this strawman warrants an extension of this contention.

Theory in detail

I clearly state that by utilitarianist principles, torturing babies for fun could turn out to be a morally good act. My opponent goes on to show how torturing a baby well actually he changed it to child could be morally acceptable if there are hundred lives at stake and we do it for the greater good.

Well I have to agree that it could be acceptable at some times but what my opponent has done is completely strawmaned my point. According to my opponents analogy, the torturer did it for the greater good and even according to motive.

This does not fit the context of my argument. Let me stress a better analogy for it. A little girl is walking down the street at night. A man comes up behind her, grabs her, drags her to an ally and mercilessly rapes, mutilates, and finally kills the girl mirthlessly while he does it.

While this is going on, a neighbor phones the police and they arrive, though to late. But there was also a boy playing with a gun he had found in his fathers closet. When he heard the police coming, he put the gun back and stopped playing around with it.

If the police had not come and the boy had continued to play with the gun, he would have accidentally shot if off. It would have hit a gas station causing it to blow up killing all the people inside and around it.

If the man had not rapped, mutilated and killed the girl, all the people at the gas station would have died. But since he did so horribly murder the girl, the lives of the people were saved. So I ask con, and I wish a direct answer, was the murder, rapist and most violator of human rights committing a morally good act when he rapped and killed the little girl?

According to utilitarianism it most certainly would be a morally good act that the rapist did. And if a man courageously tackled the rapist and even sacrificed his life to save the girl, that would have been an immoral act according to utilitarianism because his actions eventually lead to a decrease of happiness.

I again say, there is absolutely no justification relevant in utilitarianism.A steady-state economy is an economy made up of a constant stock of physical wealth (capital) and a constant population size.

In effect, such an economy does not grow in the course of time. The term usually refers to the national economy of a particular country, but it is also applicable to the economic system of a city, a region, or the entire world.

Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA) is a service we offer sellers that lets them store their products in Amazon's fulfillment centers, and we directly pack, ship, and provide customer service for these products. Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is the greatest good of the greatest number. It takes the view that an action is right if it is likely to produce the best consequences compared to all the other possible actions.

Th Th C PD T ˘˛ Th T A˙ˆ ˝˘˙˛ ˘ presents NOS: _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____. The more consistently one attempts to adhere to an ideology, the more one's sanity becomes a series of unprincipled exceptions. — graaaaaagh (@graaaaaagh) February 5, Meeting with a large group of effective altruists can be a philosophically disconcerting experience, and my recent meetup with Stanford Effective Altruist Club was no exception.

Using modern phenomenology to make sense of consciousness, to establish a solid foundation for morality, to answer the question of ultimate explanation, and other great questions of life.

Debate Issue: Utilitarianism is flawed | rutadeltambor.com