Utilitarianism can justify immoral …show more content…
action. Utilitarianism define an action to be right as long as the action produce happiness. Therefore, no matter what kind of action preformed, even if immoral action preformed, these action would justified as long as it produce more happiness than pains. Consider an example, ten patients in need of organ transplantation soon. If killing one of the patient can save the remaining nine patients, would it be right for the doctor to kill one of the patient to take his or her organs? For utilitarianism, the doctor’s act of killing the patient for his organs would be morally right. Saving nine patients with only one patient suffer meet the requirement of maximum happiness and minimum pain, therefore this act of killing would be right. But in reality, the doctor’s act would be wrong. No matter how good the consequence be, the killing of one patient is murder. Murder is wrong, it is a fact, and nothing can change a fact. Since the doctor’s act of killing the patient for his organs cannot be morally right, utilitarianism is either not true or imperfect.
Utilitarianism demands too much and cannot accommodate our personal projects, desires, values and commitments. Under utilitarianism, one judged morally on their actions based upon whether or not produce more happiness over pain. Thus, an act would selfishness when one does not take into consideration of everyone else or acts based upon self-interests. However, acting morally right can be very difficult since utilitarianism never take account of personal values, and leaves the individual less important. Say, a person have win $ $500,000, and plan to use these money to buy a new house for his mother. On his search for a good house, he reads a poster that ask for donation to save all the homeless children in Africa. For utilitarianism, it would be morally wrong for that person to buy a new house for her mother instead of donating all his money to save the homeless children in Africa. Yet, no one can say for sure that the act of buying new house for his mother would be wrong. Thu, utilitarianism is imperfect.
Utilitarianism is unjust.
Utilitarianism treats people differently based on their capacity for happiness. Utilitarianism cares only about maximizing happiness or pleasure, not the unhappiness side. In addition, the rights of individual not as important as the good for the many. For example, the hospital ten patient that in need of organ transplantation as soon as possible and nine organs available for organ transplantation. Nine of the ten patient need only one organ to survive their sickness, but the remaining patient need all nine organs to survive. Using utilitarianism to make a decision, the doctor decided to give the nine organs to the nine patient, while letting the last patient die as nothing the doctor can do to save him anymore. The doctor’s act is morally right according to utilitarianism, and in reality, can’t be consider wrong either. However, the doctor’s act of is unjust to the last patient because the act being unfair to the patient and the patient’s right to survive has been taken away. Unjust is not wrong, it is just how the world work. But unjust is imperfect and therefore utilitarianism is
imperfect.
Utilitarianism is an imperfect theory. It can, however, act as a great tool in decisions making. Utilitarianism suggests to look beyond self-interest and consider the interests of all persons affected by the consequences of actions. In this era of self-interest, utilitarianism is a powerful reminder to look beyond the self to the good of all.