John Stuart Mill's Ethical Views Of Utilitarianism
English philosopher, John Stuart Mill’s, introduced the ethical views of Utilitarianism, stating that whatever maximizes happiness for the greatest number of people is consider to be the greatest good. According to Utilitarianism, an action is morally right if it promotes happiness and morally wrong if it promotes pain. Utilitarianism is an attempt to answer the question “What should we do?” and its answer is that we ought to act in a way that the consequence produce happiness.
What I think Utilitarianism has that exceed Deontology is that, Kant’s deontology views an action to be morally right only when it follows the moral law. The consequence does not matter as oppose to Utilitarianism. As stated by Kant that we as humans must be good moral …show more content…
Everyone is born in different culture, and it’s not their fault they were born in that culture. Judgment is man strongest, but also weakest trait. You and I looking at other cultures and the way they live may see it weird and “wrong” to us, but if we were born and raised in that culture, we wouldn’t think it’s wrong. Who are we to judge other cultures? Mill gives a universal moral law: if the action maximizes happiness for the greatest number of people, it’s the right thing to do. If everyone in the world were to live by this law, there would be no diversity, no ethnic groups, and no new perspective. There would be chaos trying to unify different views together. However, for cultural relativism, I feel like it understands everyone’s situation, and it does not try to give a universal law. It lets everyone decide and choose for him or herself, and this is what we are living in right now. Cultural relativism answers the question “What should we do?” with “do what you think is best” and I honestly think that is the best answer for that question. Cultural relativism does not ask you if what you’re doing will bring happiness in the end, it also does not ask you to sacrifice your happiness for the greater number of people, nor it asks you every time you do something if your motives are good, all it ask is that everyone understands and accept an
What I think Utilitarianism has that exceed Deontology is that, Kant’s deontology views an action to be morally right only when it follows the moral law. The consequence does not matter as oppose to Utilitarianism. As stated by Kant that we as humans must be good moral …show more content…
Everyone is born in different culture, and it’s not their fault they were born in that culture. Judgment is man strongest, but also weakest trait. You and I looking at other cultures and the way they live may see it weird and “wrong” to us, but if we were born and raised in that culture, we wouldn’t think it’s wrong. Who are we to judge other cultures? Mill gives a universal moral law: if the action maximizes happiness for the greatest number of people, it’s the right thing to do. If everyone in the world were to live by this law, there would be no diversity, no ethnic groups, and no new perspective. There would be chaos trying to unify different views together. However, for cultural relativism, I feel like it understands everyone’s situation, and it does not try to give a universal law. It lets everyone decide and choose for him or herself, and this is what we are living in right now. Cultural relativism answers the question “What should we do?” with “do what you think is best” and I honestly think that is the best answer for that question. Cultural relativism does not ask you if what you’re doing will bring happiness in the end, it also does not ask you to sacrifice your happiness for the greater number of people, nor it asks you every time you do something if your motives are good, all it ask is that everyone understands and accept an