So what is a ‘good’ action? Since there are many interpretations of the word good, there must also be many interpretations of a good action. Aristotle believed that a good action was that which achieved its purpose, for example a good pen would be one that wrote.
Immanuel Kant developed a different approach, he had a principle with which he would decide moral issues: ‘act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law’ in saying this Kant believed that and action or moral could be judged whether it be good or bad, by applying it universally. For example cannibalism, if everyone became a cannibal the consequence would be the end of human kind therefore this would be considered bad in Kant’s view.
Yet another view is the utilitarianist view. Utilitarianism looks to the consequences of actions before making a moral decision, a bit like Kant’s principle. They believe that a truly moral ethical act will give the greatest pleasure.
The greatest happiness principle is also a utilitarianist principle: the greatest happiness for the greatest number. However some may criticise whether one man’s constant torture is worth the world’s happiness.
According to utilitarianist views the only thing that matters is the happiness or the happiness caused. But this view could eventually lead to hedonism, which believe that all pleasure is good. They also believe that the ultimate good is happiness and the ultimate evil is unhappiness.
But is happiness something that is always being sought for its own sake? Surely happiness is a response to a given situation and not being sought for its own sake. As G.E. Moore said ‘actions are good in themselves’ things like friendship, love, pleasure and aesthetic enjoyment.
The utilitarianist view however ignores the idea of justice, like Raphael’s example about one man’s suffering for the world’s happiness. This idea also neglects the idea of rights, should our rights be trampled on just to get good results? For example freedom of speech or faith? It also ignores backward looking reasons such as promises and obligations.
Although Raphael’s example may not be realistic, and may not apply to our lives, it states a weakness in these principles and should therefore be acknowledged.
In conclusion to this topic, we must consider all views of what is considered a good action. The answer lies in each individual’s opinion.
So is a good action that which promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest number? We have seen that this principle has a weakness that should not be ignored.
A good action should not cause unhappiness or pain, not even to a minority although it may promote the greater good. A good action must be one that pleases everyone without exclusion not just the majority.
