Utilitarianism In Contemporary Ethics Essay Example for Free

Utilitarianism In Contemporary Ethics Essay1. State the Principle of Utility as formulated by Bentham and mill about and apply it to a particular action (e. g. , lying) to illustrate how it works. (3 points. ) 2. Explain the di%erence between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. (2 points. ) 3. come upon three di%erent utilitarian philosophers and explain how their versions of utilitarianism di%er from one another. (3 points. ) 4. Identify one strength and one weakness of the utilitarian view. (2 points. )1. THE convention OF UTILITY DEFINES AN ACT OR reign THAT IS IN THE RIGHT, WILL CREATE THE sterling(prenominal) GOOD OR HAPPINESS FOR THE GREATEST NUMBER OF PEOPLE. FOR EXAMPLE, IF A FRIEND LIES TO A conclave OF HIS/HER FRIENDS, THAT GROUP OF FRIENDS COULD QUITE POSSIBLY FIND OUT active THIS LIE THAT COULD CAUSE A NEGATIVE nitty-gritty FOR THE FRIENDS. THUS, NO GOOD OR HAPPINESS WAS CREATED FROM AN ACTION THAT WAS NOT GOOD FOR THE GREATEST NUMBER OF PEOPLE.CONV ERSELY, THE PRINCIPLE OF UTILITY WOULD COND atomic number 53 AND APPROVE A LIE IF IT RESULTED IN GREATER HAPPINESS (E. G. , LYING ABOUT AN EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR TO PROTECT A PERSONS REPUTATION OR TO AVOID causing NEEDLESS DISTRESS TO FRIENDS AND FAMILY).2. RULE UTILITARIANISM MEASURES THE AMOUNT OF GOOD THAT AN INDIVIDUAL ACTION DOES ACCORDING TO A RULE OR LAW. ACT UTILITARIANISM DOES NOT infer AN ACTION IN TERMS OF RULES OR LAWS BUT WHETHER OR NOT THE ACTION BENEFITS THE MOST PEOPLE. 3. PREFERENCE UTILITARIANISM FIRST PUT FORWARD BY JOHN HARSANYI (1977) PRACTICES THAT THE net CRITERION FOR DECIDING WHAT IS GOOD OR BAD FOR AN INDIVIDUAL IS JUDGED BY THE INDIVIDUALS cause DESIRES AND PREFERENCES. NEGATIVE UTILITARIANISM BROUGHT ON BY R.N. SMART, INSTEAD OF JUDGING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE GREATEST GOOD THE PHILOSOPHY IS TO JUDGE BY WHAT CAUSES THE LEAST AMOUNT OF PAIN FOR THE MOST AMOUNT OF PEOPLE WHEN PRESENTED WITH A SITUATION THAT WOULD have in mind SUFFERING. NEGATIVE UTILITARIANIS M WAS PROPOSED BY KARL POPPER. SMART OPPOSED IT.ACT UTILITARIANISM BROUGHT ON BY WILLIAM PALEY, DETERMINES IF AN ACTION IS RIGHT IF IT FOLLOWS A RULE THAT WILL MAXIMIZE UTILITY. PALEY WAS AN EARLY PROPONENT OF UTILITARIANISM WHO COMBINED UTILITARIAN ETHICS WITH CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS.4. ONE STRENGTH OF A UTILITARIAN VIEW IS THAT IT AIMS TO HELP SOCIETY EXIST IN A carriage THAT WOULD BENEFIT THE GREATEST AMOUNT OF INDIVIDUALS IN THAT SOCIETY. ONE WEAKNESS OF UTILITARIAN VIEW IS THAT IT DOES NOT get under ones skin INTO ACCOUNT WHO DOES THE ACTION, SO LONG AS THE CONSEQUENCES OCCUR. WHY IS THIS A WEAKNESS?THE MAIN WEAKNESS OF THE hypothesis IS THAT IT CONTRADICTS OUR COMMON-SENSE ETHICAL VIEW THAT MOTIVES AND INTENTIONS MATTER AND THAT SOME ACTIONS SEEM WRONG REGARDLESS OF THEIR OUTCOME. 8. 5 POINTS.