Carol your tutor

Reply 2

Eric: The concept of Utilitarianism is a great thought, but it from a realistic view it is very flawed. Who determines what is good and what is not? Utilitarianism says that if I cause more good than I do harm I am doing the right thing, still this bring along with it what is the right thing to do? We are not God and we are should not make decisions such as these nevertheless, they will be made. There is no one good thing amongst all people , there are perceived ideals of what is good and what is right but it all depends on what culture or society that you live in. Mill refers to good as whatever makes you happy, therefore the good in whatever choice you make is whatever makes you happy. What if the good or your happiness hurts others? There are major flaws within the concept of utilitarianism, which can appear to be self-serving. Singer sees well as more of a moral issue and his beliefs are more in the middle of the road where no one is hurt and what is morally right in society. Utilitarian’s are more logical in the way that makes them seem self-serving. Their concepts may be morally sound but still lack the possibility to be beneficial to all people.

Jerry:

There is a good that have these characteristics that good is that everyone has free-speech and freedom to say and express as they may please here in the United States of America. This is what creates the highest form of utilitarianism here. John Stuart Mill stated, "utilitarianism offers a very straightforward and direct way to evaluate behavior. When given a choice between two acts, utilitarianism states that the act that should be chosen is the one that creates the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people"(Mosser.K, 2013). Singer stated that "speciesism is no more defensible than racism or sexism Singer concluded that respecting the greatest good for the greatest number of sentient beings, that is offers an argument in favor of vegetarianism or even veganism"(Mosser.K, 2013). If we can't identify a good that utilitarian seems to need then I think that everyone should have spiritual principles that applies to living, choices and the way that we treat mankind and animals this is what would make utilitarianism great own a species level. 

David:

The Utilitarian principle suggests that it is always right to act in a way that produces the greatest balance between happiness over unhappiness for the greatest possible number. The net utility (happiness-unhappiness) is important, if happiness exceeds unhappiness, we have acted ethically. The Utilitarian theory is a consequential argument. The consequentialist theory says that the consequences of ones actions determine its moral values. The utilitarian theory says that such actions must be chosen which result in the greatest amount of good for many. The moral value to a Utilitarian lies in the balancing of good consequences with harm or minimizing harm if the choice is between two or more desirable actions. The problem with this is that we let the minorities suffer as we look at the beneficial aspects of helping a majority. Secondly, there is a major problem in evaluating the greatest good as it is difficult to actually calculate or put a number to long term consequences of actions. Stuart Mills and some other utilitarians understood these differences and tried to address these concerns by making a distinction between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism evaluates the general good , whether it works for a larger benefit or not. Rule utilitarianism tried to have a look at what kind of acts one could follow as a rule in order to produce the greatest good. Singer’s position was that all animals are equal and we should not make a distinction between animals we care for and other animals who do not have any sentimental association with us. The tests on animals for example might be helping for the society as a large, but how ethical is to have tests on animals in a conscious state where we inflict pain in the name of conducting tests.