Jean Reynolds Act Utilitarianism

1) According to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, an ethical egoist is a person that “will rank as most important duties that bring her/him the highest payoff”. An ethical egoist is only concerned with their own self-interest and will only help others to receive something in return. In Jean Reynolds case, an ethical egoist would not benefit from helping her or her family out, in which case he/she would fall under option C. Option C, consists of Jean receiving no government funds or help and the idea that Jean should solve her problems on her own. An ethical egoist would not benefit from helping out someone else, when they receive nothing in return. Ayn Rand, was a philosopher who promoted the idea of ethical egoism and stated why she thought
An act utilitarian follows through a decision process which has four steps. The first step is to state the options and predict the outcome of what will happen for each. The second step is to consider whose happiness/unhappiness is affected and if so by how much. The third step is to “add” the level of happiness for each situation and get a solution, and the final step is to choose the situation that gives the highest solution for level of happiness. By using this approach, an act utilitarian may choose option A or B. However, option B would be more suitable since it states that it would help full time workers on getting a higher minimum wage, while option A only states that it would help Jean achieve her needs by getting aid. An act utilitarian wants to achieve the most good, and by helping out workers (as well as Jean) the outcome would be more positive, than by just helping Jean
Justice and peace in the world. The U.N created a declaration of standards that need to followed by all countries in the U.N. The declaration would support Jean’s situation and the option which they would most likely support is option A or B. In this case, option A would be more suitable since the declaration indicates the importance of government aid and help for the ones in need. The articles that fit in the most with Jean’s case are articles 23 and 25. Article 23 mentions that “everybody who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection”. This statement indicates that Jean has the right to ask for support for herself and her family since she is struggling to pay for basic necessities. Article 25 also points out a very important factor that would help Jean and her situation. The article indicates that “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social series, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control”. Jean’s situation perfectly fits