Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that pivots around the belief that morality should be judged by consequence and the way in which an action can be deemed moral or immoral

The security of his own happiness is not guaranteed by the actions of others. In summation then Utilitarianism as an ethical theory aims at promoting the greatest consequences or good for the greatest number but in terms of public policy in applying this philosophy to the world itself, problems are depicted throughout. Its creation was based on extending the whole democratic system, which focuses on freedom and equality of individuals, but Utilitarianism does not completely follow this notion as biases and discriminations are depicted.

Follow to try to achieve good over bad, as by following the theory of Utilitarianism is seems that is would be necessary to contradict things that appear to us as intrinsically bad. I feel there will be situations where the theory of Utilitarianism should be applied, but only if it does not contradict our instinctive believes on what is right and wrong. I believe the list of contradicting situations, to the rule that the theory of Utilitarianism should always be applied, would too long to say that Utilitarianism in practice has a great use in moral decision-making; yet it is our innate desire to do good that inspires us in moral dilemmas.

Utilitarianism is a way of looking at ethics; it focuses on trying to ensure the maximum happiness in many different ways. There are many different forms of utilitarianism; the four I will discuss are act, rule, naive and preference utilitarianism.

Rule utilitarianism tries to give the greatest overall benefit to society, the best rule/law of conduct is found and everyone is found and a rule utilitarian will follow it. However, this can cause problems if you use this rule in a place where it is not generally followed as problems will be caused if you differ from the general population. Another difficulty is that all the best rules would be very complicated and this would make them hard to follow and many...

An example of Act utilitarianism: The world is becoming too overcrowded and has at least twice the population it requires to survive; a government could cull billions of people to end this population problem. Act utilitarianism would justify this, as horrible as it would be, because it would have the good result of the world being saved. In my opinion, the best form of utilitarianism is Naive utilitarianism as it probably causes the least amount of suffering. However, all of these forms of utilitarianism exist in the world and are used to justify many decisions, good or bad. I disagree with utilitarianism as a way of ethics because its principles often overlook many vital facts.

In conclusion, Utilitarianism has many benefits for the majority due to its key principle of 'the greatest good for the greatest number' is ensured when making an ethical decision and on the whole, is beneficial in its simplistic method of making a moral choice. However, there are several undermining factors of the policy, which in collectively weaken its argument. Although Bentham's policy of seeking the greatest amount of pleasure for the most number of people is ethically correct, it cannot be applied to every situation and so Utilitarianism's downfall lies in its attempt to provide a solution for the majority in every circumstance, when in some predicaments the minority may be in the right.

Utilitarianism was originally formulated by Jeremy Bentham in the 18th century, and fully developed by John Stewart Mill in the 19th. It asserts that we should always act so as to produce the greatest ratio of good to evil for everyone concerned with our decision and as with all moral theories, has many strengths and weaknesses. The prominent criticism of Utilitarianism is that it is extremely hard to predict the results of an action. The outcomes of all situations are hard to predict, so how can we possibly apply the rule of the greatest happiness for the greatest number if we do not know who will benefit most? It is also difficult to decide whether an outcome is morally good or bad.

Mill brought it closer to the Christian church by introducing Rule Utilitarianism. This would be closer to the principals Jesus lived by. For example, it was against the Jewish law to work on the Sabbath but when people were in need, Jesus bent this rule and healed them. The largest connection Christianity has with Utilitarianism is the death of Jesus. He was crucified and died for the sins of mankind, sacrificing himself for the majority. However, Utilitarianism does accept evil where Christianity most certainly does not. In conclusion I believe that Utilitarianism is simple and easy to apply yet this does not take away the obvious large amount of flaws concerned with the theory.

Utilitarianism is usually connected with the specific doctrines of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, who both took the goodness of consequences to be measured by their effect on the happiness of human beings. Bentham was both the founder of utilitarianism and a contemporary of Mill's father, who ensured that his son received a strict utilitarian education based upon Bentham's theories. It is not surprising, then, that aspects of Mill's views on utilitarianism share fundamental similarities with those of Bentham, and also demonstrate a digression from Bentham's earlier perspectives to the further developed and more persuasive arguments characterised by Mill's Utilitarianism. A point of similarity can be drawn between the doctrines of Bentham and Mill in that both philosophers maintain the...

The two theories are similar in that they both maintain the existence of external sanctions of morality and agree that pleasure is the ultimate human end. However, Mill deviates somewhat from Bentham's definition of happiness, and took a qualitative stance on the issue, rejecting Bentham's quantitative views. Mill's abhorrence toward Bentham's hedonic calculus necessitated the classification of his Utilitarianism as an idealistic rule utilitarianism, while Bentham's doctrine is distinctly act utilitarianism. Although both Bentham and Mill's theories both possess intrinsic worth, it is evident that Mill's utilitarianism far surpasses Bentham's in persuasiveness, practicality, and intrinsic worth, and finally, is infinitely more philosophically satisfying.