Debate over Utilitarianism

The consequence of happiness is the fundamental part of the..

Debate over Utilitarianism

The consequence of happiness is the fundamental part of the utilitarianism. The criteria of right, is the result, but there are other arguments regarding other considerations apart from utility. Some people  think that utilitarianism is at odds with justice and rights. Justice requires “fair treatment of people according to their individual needs and merits”. So if a utilitarian lies for greater good, resulting in the injustice towards an innocent man, this idea of utility conflicts with the idea of justice. The real life case of Ms. York versus the police man Ron Story, clearly states that Ms. York’s legal rights were violated by taking off her objectionable picture by the police man. According to the utilitarian the greater amount of happiness over unhappiness making an action defensible, is a perverse way of thinking. It is moral common sense that rights of an individual should not be violated no
matter what. Utilitarian’s first line of defense is that once in a while utilitarian’s decisions lead to good results. The second line of defense is the modification of the classical theory called “Rule Utilitarianism or Act Utilitarianism” which is a set of preferred rules making the criteria for right and wrong. The third line of defense is that moral common sense cannot always be right. It might be influenced by prejudices and irrational feelings.
Considering Rule utilitarianism is “rule worship”, Act utilitarianism can be the best line of defense which invites us to scrutinize our, oral common sense, which has proved to be full off irrational prejudices.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Your comments (*)

Name (*)

Your full name please.

Email address (*)

Used for gravatar.


Link back if you want.