Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism
Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism
In the article, “Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism”, Louis P. Pojman explained the grounds on which utilitarianism has been attacked and showed some possible response to its defenders which imply his positive attitude towards utilitarianism [1] . In order to argue that thesis, Pojman’s one important premise is the response to the no-rest objection. He believed that the agent should aim at maximizing his or her own happiness as well as other people’s happiness and is best not to worry much about the need of those not in our primary circle.[1] .
I agree with the argument that Pojman shows. Someone who objects to it may say that everyone is equal no matter whether they are in your primary circle or not. It is not right to regard for differently to those people far away (especially poor). I would replay that under the rule utilitarianism the acceptance of a set of rules among certain range of people can lead to the maximum utility for society. Those people who not in our primary circle are following the rule that maybe totally different from what we observe. Just like the traffic rules is very different in different countries. Even if the total utility may increasing when we use our consumption to help those poor people, the rule apply to you is not the same as the rule apply to those people. The demand is different is different and hence the definition of satisfied utility is also different under their rules and situations. Utilitarianism still applies .
Bibliography
1. Louis P. Pojman, “Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism” in Steven M.Cahn “Exploring Ethics –An Introductory Anthology” (Oxford University Press, 2011 , ISBN:978-0-19-975751-0) pp.
In the article, “Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism”, Louis P. Pojman explained the grounds on which utilitarianism has been attacked and showed some possible response to its defenders which imply his positive attitude towards utilitarianism [1] . In order to argue that thesis, Pojman’s one important premise is the response to the no-rest objection. He believed that the agent should aim at maximizing his or her own happiness as well as other people’s happiness and is best not to worry much about the need of those not in our primary circle.[1] .
I agree with the argument that Pojman shows. Someone who objects to it may say that everyone is equal no matter whether they are in your primary circle or not. It is not right to regard for differently to those people far away (especially poor). I would replay that under the rule utilitarianism the acceptance of a set of rules among certain range of people can lead to the maximum utility for society. Those people who not in our primary circle are following the rule that maybe totally different from what we observe. Just like the traffic rules is very different in different countries. Even if the total utility may increasing when we use our consumption to help those poor people, the rule apply to you is not the same as the rule apply to those people. The demand is different is different and hence the definition of satisfied utility is also different under their rules and situations. Utilitarianism still applies .
Bibliography
1. Louis P. Pojman, “Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism” in Steven M.Cahn “Exploring Ethics –An Introductory Anthology” (Oxford University Press, 2011 , ISBN:978-0-19-975751-0) pp.
Bibliography: 1. Louis P. Pojman, “Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism” in Steven M.Cahn “Exploring Ethics –An Introductory Anthology” (Oxford University Press, 2011 , ISBN:978-0-19-975751-0) pp. 105-113