Free Essay

History of the Utilitarianism Ethic

In: Science

Submitted By khawke1985
Words 3007
Pages 13
PHIL320
Professor Christopher Myers
July 27, 2013
History of the Utilitarianism Ethic
The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number America lavish with a plethora of landscapes and ecosystems beyond our understanding. Truly, North America sustains some of the most opulent sights. However, our lands were not always so lush, and full of beauty. A complex history of dreams, ideas, and political affiliations came into play in the overall conservation and preservation of our landscapes. Many ethically driven environmental doctrines came into effect, to be where we are today, as a nation of conservation. Within this compendious paper, I will go into the history of some of the founding fathers of the utilitarianism concept. And how historically, this concept has shaped our nations conservation system today, and in particular shape the U.S. Forest Service.
“Where conflicting interest must be reconciled, the question shall always be answered from the standpoint of the greatest good of the greatest number in the long run.”
Gifford Pinchot North America metamorphosed into a leading influence on the fortitude of its natural resources. As the nation broadened from sea to sea, these resources seemed boundless. For the European settlers to North America, the “greater good” meant clearing the land. The trees were an encumbrance, and the timber was treasured. Before the times of the Napoleonic Wars (1800s), our nation’s economy thrived upon timber. Horses drew wooden carriages over wooden planked roads. The southern pines produced millions of barrels of tar and pitch for sealing our wooden ships (Anderson, 2000). Timber fueled train engines echoed through the landscapes of our nation on railroad ties made from timber, and replaced at a rapid rate. As our forests of the North, East, South, and West all had fell to the perpetual axe, a cry rain out to our nation, and by 1832, of an ominous warning of a shortage of timber, commonly referred to as the “Timber Famine,” (Anderson, 2000). A fight for conservation had began, a flame was light, that would ignite a fire storm of passion, debate, scandals, anger, and a overall devotion to the ideology of utilitarianism concept of conservation. In 1864, George Perkins Marsh wrote his profound novel Man and Nature, within his text Marsh compared the devastated cut-down mountains of his native Vermont to the destitute landscapes of the Mediterranean. As a United States councilman in Italy and Turkey, George Perkins Marsh had been heavyhearted. For the land that was once ample with trees, was now lost. Marsh pleaded with the United States that we could become like the Mediterranean if we did not act agile to the concerns of our land (Anderson, 2000). And just when George Perkins Marsh’s worst fears came true, and he felt all hope was forsaken, just a year after his publication of Man and Nature, a boy was born that would forever shift our environment with a passion and love for the outdoors. And with his influential parents, would lead him to become one of the many of Americans forefathers of conservation, Gifford Pinchot (Anderson, 2000). Gifford Pinchot’s dream since he was a young-boy was to repair the land that his grandfather and great-grandfather had demolished. Pinchot’s, family emigrated from France, and settled in Milford Pennsylvania (Lewis, 2007). Gifford’s family flourished in riches by cutting down forests, and selling the land to farmers (2007). And by the late 1800s Gifford’s parents were among the many of those who feared the possibility of a timber famine. The Gifford family had built a summer home known as Grey Towers, and set out to restore the damaged landscapes; they help destroy (Lewis, 2007). The Pinchot’s used their wealth to make an impact on American life itself. James and Mary Pinchot donated most of their values to that very cause. During Gifford’s studies at Yale University, his parents gave him an addition to his Man and Nature re-titled The Earth as Modified by Human Action, which was a gift to Gifford for his twenty-first birthday (Steen, 2004). Little did James and Mary Pinchot realize, how much of an impingement that Marshes book would have, in constructing the path to Gifford’s career and dreams (Steen, 2004). Gifford Pinchot had went forth to his professor in Yale University and announced how he wanted to be a “forester” but he did not know how, his professor confused, did not know how either. There were simply no forestry programs in the United States at that time, so Pinchot set out to Europe (Steen, 2004). In France and Germany Pinchot studied how forests could be properly managed using the fundamental of “sustained yield.” Essentially trees were a crop, which could be harvested profitably forever (Steen, 2004). Pinchot was an advocate to what modern foresters call “scientific forestry” however; he thought that concept should be applied differently within the United States (Seen, 2004). Pinchot believed that the American forests should reflect the democratic values of the nation. Americas land should be managed to the benefit of all, which we know now as a utilitarianism method (Lewis, 2007). Unfortunately, the United States was not on the same page as Pinchot. The General Land Office of the U.S. a part of the Department of the Interior was simply giving all of their resources away. Land grants to railroads opened the West to rapid development. Uncontrolled mining, branching, and logging reshaped the western landscape indefinitely (Lewis, 2007). Thus, in 1891 Congress had added a one-sentence amendment to the Land Law Reform Bill. However, no one could had predicted how these simple words could have such a far reaching affect, in what would become the substructure of the federal system of public lands. The Forest Reserve Act of 1891, states “The president of the United States may set apart and reserve public land bearing forests as public reservations,” (Lewis, 2007). The significance of the Forest Reserve Act of the late 1800s is that it ever happened at all. Attitude towards public land was to simply depart of them all together, to railroads, land speculators, and homesteaders (Gittinger, 1939). However, a nation would decide in 1891 that some lands would never be simply just “given away”. Those lands would be held in the hands of the people, which was a variation in conservation. This was a primitive step, that would be better for the nation as a whole, to keep some lands in the public ownership, so that they could be managed for the good of all people, and prevent any resource damage as in the past (Lewis, 2007). By the time former President Benjamin Harrison term had ended in the late 1800’s. Harrison had designated over fifteen reserves, but the forest reserve act did not specify what should be done with the reserved lands (Kelly, 2012). Should these lands be protected for their artistic and recreational values? Or should the lands be open to the communities? President Grover Cleveland before he left office in 1908 had double the size of forest reserves from 19 million to 39 million acres (History, 2013). This caused much debate in the western states, many congressmen argued and pushed to get back their lands lost in the 1897 Reserve Acts. Furthermore, many individuals on opposing scientific communities created their own “act.” The Organic Act of 1897 was generated to improve and protect the forest favorable conditions of water flows continuous supply of timber. It was a difficult time for forest management; it was one thing to have land set-aside, but entirely a different story to know what to do with the land (Gittinger, 1939). Furthermore, the Organic Act of 1897 just paved the path for Gifford Pinchot to begin the never-ending challenge of forestry in the United States. Pinchot resided within a beautiful home to entertain the right crowd to peruse his ideology of forestry within the United States (Steen, 2004). Eventually Pinchot’s family had created a school of forestry in Yale University (Lewis, 2007). Pinchot creates the school, he created the industry that provides the labor for the students and he creates the Journal that they will all read “The Journal of Forestry.” Pinchot further creates the professional organization that they will all join and pay their dues “Society of American Foresters 1900.” Pinchot created the true profession of a “forester,” (Steen, 2004). After the assignation of former President McKinley this gave birth to a new century of dramatic attributes. After the death of McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt became our nation’s president. Theodore Roosevelt was a notorious conservationist; he had a long history of a passion for the land and nature (Miller, 2013). Pinchot and Roosevelt became instant allies; Roosevelt worked to get the forest reserves out of the land office- and into the hands of Gifford Pinchot (Miller, 2013). Pinchot anathematized the General Land Office which was a part of the Department of the Interior. Pinchot realized they were a corrupt political system, nothing more (Miller, 2013). Shortly thereafter, Pinchot then organized The American Forest Congress in January, 1905. The American Forest Congress provided political backing for the transferring of all the forest reserves from the Department of the Interior to the Department of Agriculture (Miller, 2013). Pinchot then generated what was once referred to as the Bureau of Forestry, and transformed it into the United States Forest Service (Miller, 2013). Pinchot even changed the term forest “reserves” to “national” forest. Pinchot felt that “national” was a better term for national meaning nationally owned, and nationally controlled (2013). This all coincided with the Forest Service slogan that the Forest Service was to serve the people (Miller, 2013). By the end of President Teddy Roosevelt’s first term he had set-apart over 20-million acres of land for National Forests. And by the end of Roosevelt’s second-term, he had set-apart 80-million acres of all acclaimed National Forest lands. Pinchot had become the advocate for President Roosevelt’s “Conservation Movement” across the United States (Miller, 2013). Within the early years of the Progressive Era, a thick divide had been created. Men like Pinchot who favored wise use (conserve) and men like another founding father John Muir, who favored more federal regulations (preserve). John Muir argued that the national forest that was being created should be untouched, and preserved not conserved. The lands should not be used for livestock, grazing, timber, or recreational use. Pinchot disagreed, and he sought that the only way to save the lands was to conserve them. Both men had entirely two different visions on how the lands should be applied. Pinchot was for the democratic viewpoint for the use of nature to benefit as many people as possible, the utilitarian approach. Whereas Muir stood for nature and that nature is a place where we all go to understand the creation in its whole glory. Nonetheless, these theories began were on a collision course (Miller, 2013). These two viewpoints collided within the Yosemite National Park, within the Hetch-Hetchey Valley. This lush valley was one of the most controversial events in conservation history (Sierra Club, 2013). In 1906 was a mark in our history for the first time between the development and the preservation on national level affiliation (2013). “John Muir felt that Hetch Hetchy should be preserved, and Gifford believed that the water ways should be used for Sand Francisco needed a new reservoir” (Sierra Club, 2013). In the end the Congress had chosen Pinchot’s theory and this was a devastating blow to John Muir and his ethical standpoint on environmental impacts. The core issue with conservation is economically you are never going to solve conservation if you cannot address the fundamental well being of the community (Anderson, 2000). You cannot address the fundamental social justice in the community if you cannot address economics and development both (Anderson, 2000). Example: Pinchot believed that forestry would only gain success if the citizens felt that it was paying a dividend to them personally. This “idea” generated one of the largest controversies in American history. When William Henry Taft became our nations President after Roosevelt era, Pinchot actualized that there was no longer a conservationist in office. The Taft Administration was releasing public lands to Richard Ballenger (Secretary of the Interior). Pinchot and his followers had implicated Ballenger in the “Alaskan Scandal” and blamed President Taft, for not firing Ballinger. And in 1910, Taft fired Gifford Pinchot not Ballenger (Anderson, 2000). Pinchot’s “dismissal” was not such a heartbreaking ending; this allocated for Pinchot the ability to openly campaign in conservation efforts. Pinchot had created something new to that era of conservation. A storm had been brewing for years, and was now about to unleash hell (Lewis, 2007). After the Hetch Hetchey controversy, the Department of the Interior felt that they would do a more sufficient job in managing the national forest areas. The Park Service was generated winning some of the rights which generated much debate between the Forest Service and the Park Service of the United States. The Park Service began building roads near lakes on land they had purchased, and a flash flood of development merged on National Park land (Anderson, 2000). Then a man with a passion and lust for nature and wildlife that was profound, that it forever our changed our nation in conservational management. Aldo Leopold had worked for the U.S. Forest Service in 1909 within the Arizona Territories. His job was to measure the Apache National Forest with his small crew. Aldo shared the same utilitarian ideology that Pinchot believed in. Aldo believed that wildlife should be managed to maximize fish and game (Nix, 2013). Aldo Leopold like many others during his time was unaware of the complexities of the interrelationship between predators, prey, and their landscapes they sustained. Fish and game were being overharvested, there were no limits or regulations set-in-place during these times (Nix, 2013). A notable journal entry of Aldo Leopold which has been used many times during conservation debates is when Aldo had come across a mother wolf:
We reached the old wolf in time to watch a fierce green fire dying in her eyes. I realized then, and have known ever since, that there was something new to me in those eyes - something known only to her and to the mountain. I was young then, and full of trigger-itch; I thought that because fewer wolves meant more deer, that no wolves would mean hunters' paradise. But after seeing the green fire die, I sensed that neither the wolf nor the mountain agreed with such a view.
Aldo Leopold By the time Leopold had left the Arizona territory, the wolves were near extinction. Aldo looking back on his “wolf” killing moment realized his job was much more than managing the national forests.
Truly the measure of our success is not on how many deer we can raise and harvest, we need to use the land as the standard. Land is the ultimate measure and reflection of all that we do upon it, as manager, citizens, and users.
Aldo Leopold Aldo had came to the realization that there was much more to the forest that could be sustained what he referred to as “wilderness hunting grounds.” Leopold generated a plan that a large portion of national forest be set aside and not developed for roads (Nix, 2013). He brought forth a proposal a Gila wilderness area, and was eventually approved in congress in 1924. This event set forth a pattern for the wilderness areas we have today (2013). A man named Bob Marshall eventually worked with Aldo Leopold and created the Wilderness Society in 1935 (Nix, 2013). After WWII and the baby boom following after the World War, Americans were in devolpmental frenzy. Countless amounts of timber were being pushed through logging industries and alarming rates. Within the middle of 1946 over 700,000 houses were being built, and having little to no private lands with forest left, it placed upon public lands to sustain the timber for the big boom (White Mountain History, 2013). John Muir’s ideologies during his era were not favorable. It was not until the nation began a movement of social shifting into the time of “peace and change.” The public lands were being cleared in a method known as “clear cutting” and even though Gifford Pinchot had passed away in 1946; his son Gifford Bryce Pinchot entered the political stage in the name of the late Pinchot. When Pinchot’s grandson visited the Idaho Bitterroot national forest, he had seen a large piece of a mountain referred to as the “Oh My God” mountain. This made the son of the late Pinchot heartbroken and denounced the U.S. Forest Service in his father’s name (White Mountain History, 2013). Clear cutting eventually received a large negative impact on the people and thus a flash flood of laws began to be implemented:
Wilderness Act of 1964
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act 1968
National Environmental Policy Act 1970
Clean Water Act 1972
Endangered Species Act 1973
Resources Planning Act 1974
Eastern Wilderness Act 1975
National Forest Management Act 1976 These “Acts” were all implemented in the hopes of creating and generating a positive shift in environmental policy (Anderson, 2000). All regulations that John Muir was theorizing during his era that back then, the people were not ready for. Each Act is defined by the idea that you must have conservation and preservation in mind. You cannot reach sustainability without the utilitarianism approach such as the hopes and dreams of Gifford Pinchot, or the dreams of John Muir. Each man had their own passion and love for our nation’s beauty, and in the end they both wanted to see their children enjoy these beautiful landscapes of North America.

Works Cited "American President: Franklin Delano Roosevelt: A Life in Brief." Miller Center. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 July 2013. .
Anderson, Kerby . "Utilitarianism: The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number-Probe Ministries." Probe Ministries - A Christian Worldview and Apologetics Ministry-Probe Ministries. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 July 2013.…...

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Similarities and Differences Between Virtue Theory, Utilitarianism, and Deontological Ethics

...Similarities and Differences Between Virtue Theory According to Boylan (2009), “ethics is the science concerning the right and wrong of human behavior.” It is a method that allows us to organize our values and go after them. It helps us answer questions like: do I seek my own happiness, or do I sacrifice myself for a greater cause? According to "Ethics - Definition And More From The Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary" (2012), ethics is “the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation.” Because we are beings living together in society, we all go through tough moral decisions like a father deciding whether his son’s end-of-the-year school concert is more important than his business meeting, or accepting gifts from vendors when a contract bid is under evaluation. Moral decisions require moral reasoning and deliberation, which takes place within certain perspectives three of which are virtue ethics, utilitarianism, and deontologism. Virtue ethics focuses on how to be; studies what makes the character traits of people. A person who has these traits will act by habit in certain ways not because of its consequences but because it is what a virtuous person would do. The Boy Scout pledge is an example of virtue ethics because he pledges to be a certain person. Utilitarianism is the view that says “if an act will produce more happiness than will alternatives, it is the right thing to do, and if it will produce less happiness, it would be wrong to do......

Words: 640 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Comparison Between Deontological and Utilitarianism Ethics

...Comparison between deontological and utilitarian ethics Deontological ethics Deontology is a normative theory attributed to Immanuel Kant, which focuses on the concept of the duty. It is concerned on fulfilling what is believed to be a moral duty without considering its impact to other people. It takes the stand that the duty defines the right actions regardless of the consequences. The hold of deontological ethics is that doing right is what conform the moral laws. According to Kant, right actions are not done by following inclinations, impulses or obeying the principle of greatest happiness but are done simply and purely from the sense of duty. Kessler says that some ethical truths and norms are appropriate to everyone in the society, and therefore, people should always act morally irrespective of the outcome for their morals. In deontology ethics, actions are done for the sake of duty. The intrinsic moral feature determines the rightness or wrongness of the act taken by individuals. The duty should always be done by taking the right. For example, duty of a teacher is to benefit a student, and he would like to know the impact of different teaching techniques to the student so as to help him determine the technique which can and cannot benefit the students. Therefore, the rightness of the action is dictated by the rule of the act and not by the outcomes of the act. Rather, outcomes helps to determine the best action to up keep the established duty. Kant says that in...

Words: 1539 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Compare the Similarities and Differences Between Virtue Theory, Utilitarianism, and Deontological Ethics.

...Ethics Essay Sandra Faye ETH/316 March 6, 2012 Irma Flores-Brothers Ethics Essay Ethics is the science of right and wrong in human action.” (Boyle, 2009, Chapter 1, Living in a World of Values). The overall purpose of this paper is to compare the similarities and differences between the three major approaches in normative ethics; virtue theory, utilitarianism, and deontological ethics. I will do this by analyzing these ethical theories and by describing them along with presenting the facts on how each theory relates to ethics and morality. It will also include a personal experience to explain the relationship between virtue, values, and moral concepts as they relate to one of the three theories. We have all been faced with the circumstances that have pushed our moral boundaries. Virtue ethics refers more specifically to one character embodying for determining or evaluating ethical behavior. In other words virtue ethics emphasizes one moral character.  According to Boylan (2009), virtue ethics is also sometimes called agent-based or character ethics. It takes the viewpoint that in living your life you should try to cultivate excellence in all that you do and all that others do. (Chapter 11, It’s All About Your Character: Virtue Ethics). For example, finding a wallet with money in it, and returning it to the rightful owner is an act of virtue. One of my proudest moments growing up as a 15years old......

Words: 665 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Ethics Essay: Virtue, Utilitarianism Theories, and Deontological Ethics

...three ethical theories virtue, utilitarianism theories, and deontological ethics will described relating factors to ethics and morality. Definitions for each will be given followed by how they relate in comparison to ethics and morals. Conclude by explaining the relationship between virtue, values, and moral concepts as they relate to ethics. Comparing morals and ethical theories helps one to understand a person’s guidance method, which helps or aides a person through their decision making process. Each theory will emphasize the different points including predicting the outcome or end results. To compare the similarities and differences between virtue, utilitarianism theories, and deontological ethics, you will see the breakdown what is meant by virtue and utilitarianism concepts and how they are defined. Stemming from my research, we understand ethics is the study of the person’s action and how that person determines right and wrong. And morals are our ability to determine right from wrong influenced by our upbringing in a religious environment. According to Merriam Webster Dictionary (n.d.), virtues are “conformity to a standard of right” and “a commendable quality or trait”. When I think about virtues, I imagine a person who does what is right no matter what the situation. This person must possess a quality trait that makes him or her believe that there is a higher power they have to eventually have to answer to in the end. “Virtue ethics is also sometimes called......

Words: 923 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Medical Ethics: History and Guiding Principals

...Title: Medical Ethics: History and Guiding Principles Author: Alan J. McGoldrick Course: Medicine, Disease and History Instructor: Professor Foss Date: June 15, 2012 Medical ethics are the moral guidelines and ethical laws that help to prioritize a medical professional's work responsibilities. The code of medical ethics outlines the proper conduct between medical professionals and their patients, communities, and colleagues. Each country has a different code of medical ethics, though most contain the same basic principles, and all share the same history of evolution, according to the World Medical Association. Medical ethics refers to the discussion and application of moral values and responsibilities in the areas of medical practice and research. While questions of medical ethics have been debated since the beginnings of Western medicine in the fifth century B.C., medical ethics as a distinctive field came into prominence only since World War II. (Porter, 1998) This change has come about largely as a result of advances in medical technology, scientific research, and telecommunications. These developments have affected nearly every aspect of clinical practice, from the confidentiality of patient records to end-of-life issues. Moreover, the increased involvement of government in medical research as well as the allocation of health care resources brings with it an additional set of ethical questions. Emerging Medical Ethics Through the Ages Ancient......

Words: 1879 - Pages: 8

Premium Essay

Virtue Theory, Utilitarianism, and Deontological Ethics Paper

...Virtue theory, utilitarianism, and deontological ethics are all examples of morals and ethics and have their similarities and differences. In this paper the similarities and differences will be explored a personal experience shared. Virtue theory is how a person acts and does not take into consideration particular acts, rules, or consequences, the only consideration is if the person is acting morally or unmorally. Virtue theory is composed of three main ideas eudemonism, agent-based theories, and the ethics of care. Eudemonism is based in reasoning, agent-based theories are based in common sense and intuition, and ethics of care is solely based on justice and it should be noted as a primarily feminist idea. Utilitarianism is maximizing pleasure over pain not for only oneself but for the greatest number of people possible. Utilitarianism is often seen in a religious sense and can be attributed to the Christian teaching of Jesus Christ or the Buddhist teaching of the Buddha. Utilitarianism can also be seen as a hedonist as written about by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, since the act does not cause a negative effect for others. Utilitarianism’s main lesson is maximizing pleasure over pain, but can be interpreted in more than one way. Deontological ethics is basically making the correct moral choices; this can be seen through a religious spectrum as following the rules of the (Christian) church and doing the Lord God’s will. The person committing an act......

Words: 576 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Utilitarianism: Ethics

...PHIL 1 1 May 2013 Utilitarianism: Ethics Many people in this generation are living a media influenced lifestyle based on having “no regrets” and not taking into account the effects their irresponsible behavior may result in. The world would turn into pure chaos if people lived with “no regrets,” each individual must live and know their regrets; a person should learn and build off of the mistakes that either they or someone else has made in the past. John Stuart Mill’s ethical theory of Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, which means by observing similar past events people are able to predict what may happen in their future. As a result of learning from past events a person would therefore be able to make a choice that would bring maximum utility in future occasions. "Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure" (p.412). Mill believes that looking at the motives behind an action are needed to find the source of why a certain choice was made, but the source does not always explain the action, because even though a person may be good morally they may do a wrongful action, even though they may or may not have been acting with the best of motives. However, that person can always get maximum utility (happiness) if it follows the theory of utilitarianism. Ignorance is not......

Words: 1566 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Utilitarianism in Ethics

...Ethical Relativism Vs. Utilitarianism Last time we saw Jim, he was returning from a day hike through the rainforest in South America. Unfortunately, he was captured by government troops along with rebel fighters who were being detained for execution. Fortunate enough for him, the government commander put Jim in a life changing situation, kill the rebel leader himself and he along with the remaining rebels get let go. If he failed to do so, the commander and his troops will execute all the rebels, sack their village for anything of value, and leave Jim stranded in the rainforest with no supplies, resulting in almost certain death. Through analyzing the theory of ethical relativism, we were able to decide that Jim should in fact kill the rebel leader, but what if we analyze another ethical theory? Will we come up with the same answer as we did before? Or is it possible that through the research of different theories and ideas we can come up with a completely different response to Jim’s unusual predicament? Using a new theory, utilitarianism, or, the idea that actions are right if they are useful or for the benefit of a majority, we can further analyze why Jim should still kill the rebel leader and why it is a better answer than if we were to use relativism. This paper will describe the ethical theory of utilitarianism in great detail, it will than be applied to Jim’s situation just like before, challenge opposing viewpoints of utilitarianism, refresh ourselves on why we......

Words: 3069 - Pages: 13

Premium Essay

Utilitarianism Ethics

...Kimberly Avera Dr. A. Brown, Professor Business Ethics 368 September 5, 2015 Utilitarianism Unlike so many methods which try to define morality, utilitarianism philosophers simply believed that morality is about happiness and not about following rules. It is ultimately the child of egoism and Kantian duty. Often defined as what views are best for individuals and the people that may surrounded by them who will be affected by the actions taken. Utilitarianism can be describe in two units, act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. In this paper, we will look at it from three different philosophers’ perspective: Jeremy Bentham, Immanuel Kant and will show how utilitarianism played a major part in the withdrawal of the acquisition between Lockheed Martin and Northrop. Utilitarianism seems to be an easy thing to grasp and comprehend. Well, it should be since so many recognized philosophers adapted and jointly bridged the differences of this subject. One in particular, Jeremy Bentham, contributed to this subject greatly. His writings and dissection of laws was a craft lie none other. Throughout his life, several writings of his has made him famous regarding the definition of Utilitarianism. Being the avid reader that he was, after the publishing of the Declaration of Independence, Bentham began to write. He wrote the essay “Short Review of the Declaration” that was in the British response to the Americas. After this piece, he then published his first book A Fragment on......

Words: 1112 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Utilitarianism

... Utilitarianism Essay Shirnel Charles Grand Canyon University: PHI-305 Ethical Thinking in Liberal Arts Instructor John Wise September 21, 2014 The Story of Ethics states that the point of the Utilitarian theory is to conceptualize exactly what is good life by “bringing about consequences of a certain sort that is the greatest happiness for the greatest number” (The Story of Ethics). The Story of Ethics also states that the Utilitarian principle of greatest happiness for the greatest number was first popularized by Jeremy Bentham who according to the Lecture Note “version of utilitarianism is known as quantitative utilitarianism” (Lecture Note). According to The Story of Ethics Bentham states that the principle of utility recognizes right and wrong and the causes and effects from right and wrong. These effects can lead to the nature of mankind being either in pain or pleasure and “Bentham assumes that one can only act according to their aversion to pain or desire for pleasure” (The Story of Ethics). The understanding that I have gained from Bentham’s theory is that good and bad is judged by pleasure and pain that is the greater the pleasure the greater the good and the greater the pain the greater the bad. Bentham’s theory is the ethical position that influenced both John Stuart Mill and his father James Mill. According to an article in the Salem Press Biographical Encyclopedia “the central aim of John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism is to defend the view that......

Words: 992 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Virtue Theory, Utilitarianism, and Deontological Ethics

...theory, utilitarianism, and deontological ethics In this composition, I will equate the relationships and variances between virtue theory, utilitarianism, and deontological ethics. I will examine the disparities in how each principle tackles principles and virtues, and finally illuminate an individual experience concerning virtue, values, and moral concepts, and how they relate to one of the three theories. Individually ethics has elements that are the similar and different. Virtue Theory is a method to ethics that highlights a person's character as the main component of moral thinking, rather than guidelines about the actions themselves or their costs. Utilitarianism is the examination we should do is justly generating the highest conceivable value for the highest achievable amount of people. Deontological ethics is in observance of the Scriptures, accepted ethical rule and perceptions from common logic. The similarities between the three are that they define moral and immoral characteristics about an individual, and with the determination of their activities, it also governs the quality of the person that is virtue ethics. Utilitarianism is comparable that finds the decency in an individual. A subject it avoids is finding the immoral in an individual. Per deontological ethics, the outcome of the act is moral not immoral. It holds actions that are ethically necessary for penalties made by individual activities. The differences amongst the three ethics are,......

Words: 624 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Utilitarianism

...Theodore Rapanu Introduction to Ethics - Utilitarianism WC: 1406 TA: Jonatan Sennai Larsson Utilitarianism is the view that actions are morally right if and only if they maximize utility, where utility is defined as the balance of pleasure to pain. In this sense, utilitarianism is hedonistic – it considers pleasure to be the singular good, and pain the singular bad. Pleasures and pains are episodic, and the magnitude of their effect on utility is dependent on both duration and intensity. Utilitarianism is universalistic, so the pleasures and pains of all beings capable of sensation are considered and weighted equally. Finally, utilitarianism is consequentialist. In other words, actions do not have an inherent rightness or wrongness. Rather, the theory examines the consequences of actions in assessing their morality. In drawing its conclusions about morality, utilitarianism does not take into account any laws, societal conventions, or religious views. It looks exclusively at the resultant pleasures and pains in all affected agents. Jeremy Bentham developed a ‘hedonic calculus’ to help quantify utilitarianism. In short, his methodology involves evaluating the utility of each possible action at a given moment. The action generating the highest utility represents a moral obligation. Any action producing a lower utility is morally wrong. It is crucial to understand that morality is determined retrospectively in this theory: it is the real outcomes that matter, not the......

Words: 1497 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Utilitarianism

...Utilitarianism Overview 1. Fundamental Tenets of Utilitarianism 2. Standards of Utility/History of Utilitarianism 3. The Utilitarian Calculus 4. Act and Rule Utilitarianism 5. Criticisms of Utilitarianism 6. Concluding Assessment Basic Insights of Utilitarianism n The purpose of morality is to make the world a better place. n Morality is about producing good consequences, not having good intentions n We should do whatever will bring the most benefit (i.e., intrinsic value) to all of humanity. n The Purpose of Morality n The utilitarian has a very simple answer to the question of why morality exists at all: – The purpose of morality is to guide people’s actions in such a way as to produce a better world. n Consequently, the emphasis in utilitarianism is on consequences, not intentions. Fundamental Imperative nThe fundamental imperative of utilitarianism is: Always act in the way that will produce the greatest overall amount of good in the world. –The emphasis is clearly on consequences, not intentions. The Emphasis on the Overall Good n We often speak of “utilitarian” solutions in a disparaging tone, but in fact utilitarianism is a demanding moral position that often asks us to put aside self-interest for the sake of the whole. n Utilitarianism is a morally demanding position for two reasons: – It always asks us to do the most, to maximize utility, not to do the minimum. ...

Words: 1813 - Pages: 8

Premium Essay

Utilitarianism

...Utilitarianism ENG300 Information Literacy Assessment [Type the author name] This paper will discuss utilitarianism, its origins and how we can apply it to our lives today. I will show what would happen if everyone adopted this code of ethics and reasoning, and why I chose it.   Utilitarianism What is Utilitarianism? According to our textbooks, utilitarianism is the ethical system which believes that which is ethical is what will bring the greatest good or happiness to the greatest number of people (Turner, 2006). In a direct quote from the American Heritage Dictionary, utilitarianism is the ethical theory proposed by Jeremy Bentham and James Mill that all action should be directed toward achieving the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people (The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language). Though there are many varieties of the view discussed, utilitarianism is generally held to be the view that the morally right action is the action that produces the most good. There are many ways to spell out this general claim. One thing to note is that the theory is a form of consequentialism: the right action is understood entirely in terms of consequences produced. What distinguishes utilitarianism from egoism has to do with the scope of the relevant consequences. On the utilitarian view one ought to maximize the overall good — that is, consider the good of others as well as one's own good (Driver, 2009).A well-known dialogue by......

Words: 865 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Utilitarianism & Virtue Ethics

...© 2009 Ethics in a Nutshell By Matt Deaton, M.A. MattDeaton.net Ethics is the systematic reason-guided study of what we morally ought to do. It’s one of the four main sub-disciplines of philosophy, the other three being logic, metaphysics and epistemology. While most people defer to religion or society or their gut when deciding moral dilemmas, ethicists think through them for themselves. Whether or not we fully adopt their approach, we can all learn a thing or two from ethicists about asking the right questions, paying attention to the right factors, and holding a consistent set of moral beliefs. Oughts Based On Reason The difference between ethics and other ways of deciding what one ought to do is that ethics entails the rigorous use of reason. What we ought to do is one of those slippery questions to which conclusive answers are hard to pin down. All the traditional authorities have their flaws. Because religions ultimately appeal to faith, not evidence, and different religions proscribe different moral mandates, the objective thinker has no principled way to decide which to follow. Citing the Koran won’t convince a Christian, citing the Bible won’t convince a Muslim, and citing either won’t convince an atheist. Therefore, since ethicists want to appeal to reasons anyone can accept—regardless of their religious position—they can’t defer to holy books. Also, because societies disagree what morality entails, each just as confident in their......

Words: 3408 - Pages: 14