Theory Of Utilitarianism: Huge Interest And Influence
Force and Legal Compliance
Johnnie Garcia
ETH/316
November 17, 2014
Daniel Heller
Force and Legal Compliance “What does it mean to say that a rule would produce the best consequences?” The theory of “utilitarianism is a huge interest and influence. Additionally we may ask how “utilitarianism” is discussed and how might it be criticized or defended?
Utilitarianism
Jeremy Bentham an English philosopher and political thinker has been described as the modern father or utilitarianism. According to Law (2012), “He defended the greatest happiness principle,” which claims that an action is rand only if, it leads to the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people it affects; as such actions are judged not in themselves but in terms …show more content…
Utilitarianism cannot justify legal rights because legal rights have what is called moral force. This idea operates in according to moral rights. Meaning that by having the right to do something, this provides a challenging edge against objections to my doing it, as well as a presumption against others ' interference. Other contemplations might otherwise be fitting against my so acting, in the absence of my having the right, or it could substantiate others ' intrusion, are ineffective in its presence. Furthermore if an individual’s legal right is to have something, then moral force will depend on the circumstances. Let’s take for example if an individual lacks a particular legal right, then certain actions will be morally justified, but if they have that legal right (all other things being equal) then those actions are will not be not morally …show more content…
Therefore power covers all social relationships, which serve that end, from physical violence to the most subtle psychological ties by which one mind controls another. According to “Beyond Intractability” (2003), “Power covers the domination of man by man, both when it is disciplined by moral ends and controlled by constitutional safeguards, as in Western democracies, and when it is that untamed and barbaric force which finds its laws in nothing but its own strength and its sole justification in its aggrandizement” (para. Coercive Power). Once we have the idea of different orders of desires, and of how we may be prevented from what we truly want to do by our more basic desires, there is scope for external help but also external
Johnnie Garcia
ETH/316
November 17, 2014
Daniel Heller
Force and Legal Compliance “What does it mean to say that a rule would produce the best consequences?” The theory of “utilitarianism is a huge interest and influence. Additionally we may ask how “utilitarianism” is discussed and how might it be criticized or defended?
Utilitarianism
Jeremy Bentham an English philosopher and political thinker has been described as the modern father or utilitarianism. According to Law (2012), “He defended the greatest happiness principle,” which claims that an action is rand only if, it leads to the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people it affects; as such actions are judged not in themselves but in terms …show more content…
Utilitarianism cannot justify legal rights because legal rights have what is called moral force. This idea operates in according to moral rights. Meaning that by having the right to do something, this provides a challenging edge against objections to my doing it, as well as a presumption against others ' interference. Other contemplations might otherwise be fitting against my so acting, in the absence of my having the right, or it could substantiate others ' intrusion, are ineffective in its presence. Furthermore if an individual’s legal right is to have something, then moral force will depend on the circumstances. Let’s take for example if an individual lacks a particular legal right, then certain actions will be morally justified, but if they have that legal right (all other things being equal) then those actions are will not be not morally …show more content…
Therefore power covers all social relationships, which serve that end, from physical violence to the most subtle psychological ties by which one mind controls another. According to “Beyond Intractability” (2003), “Power covers the domination of man by man, both when it is disciplined by moral ends and controlled by constitutional safeguards, as in Western democracies, and when it is that untamed and barbaric force which finds its laws in nothing but its own strength and its sole justification in its aggrandizement” (para. Coercive Power). Once we have the idea of different orders of desires, and of how we may be prevented from what we truly want to do by our more basic desires, there is scope for external help but also external