The question may arise then, would they choose to not spend the money on gas, and be forced to find other ways of transportation. In a utopian society this might ring true, but in real life, other forms of transportation are unlikely to assist in their transportation problem. The truth of the matter is that we live in a mobile society, and those individuals without the capability of being mobile are at a rather complete disadvantage to those parts of society that have the disposable income to weather such events as a raise in gas prices.
The greater good for the greater amount of people would be to allow the industry more leeway in the research they are conducting into new fuel as well as improving the fuels they currently manufacture.
For instance, if people fear going to hospitals, this is not a good thing, an ancillary result of the forced transplants. Therefore agent relativity such as Dr. Tooley's above becomes necessary. In this case, the philosopher compares the world with the transplant and without the transplant. Since it could be argued that the world might be worse with the transplants (for example, the reason stated above), then a utilitarian
However, whereas the strict rule utilitarian global conservationist would prohibit jet travel completely, the act utilitarian would certainly consider the corresponding purpose or value of any use of jet power. The act utilitarian would weigh the respective concerns and determine whether or not the proposed benefit or the total amount of "good" associated with the act outweighs the admitted cost in additional damage to the global environment. That analysis
Utilitarian perspective on ethics Utilitarian ethics proposes that actions are considered right or wrong according to the greatest amount of people that they help and/or make happy. The two foremost pioneers of the theory were Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill although Utilitarianism, in some form, always existed started off with hedonism and Aristotle (each of whom advocated different forms of eudemonia / contentment / happiness). Branches of classical utilitarianism are
Ethical Decision-Making in Business Ethics refers to what we believe is right or wrong and shows in what we do or do not do (Walsh 2003). It does not provide all the answers or clear answers about what is right or wrong to everyone at all times. But it does propose what is acceptable universally in all or many of the aspects of life. It involves standards of actions or human
They seek pleasure and avoid pain in their assessment of the situation. Therefore, consequentialism is hedonistc and egotism. Using this argument, one could say that utilitarianism is more altruistic than consequentialism. However, utilitarianism is not completely altruistic either. Utilitarianism is neither altruistic nor egotistic. However, it is difficult to call consequentialism altruistic. Some acts might have a hint of altruism, but there are few that consider the consequences of
Peer Reply 1: Rebecca Haynes I have the same concerns regarding health care costs and who will pay for it. On the one hand, I can understand the predicament: someone has to foot the bill later on down the road, but at the moment people need care and that should not be ignored. Figuring out the best approach so that the greatest common good can be achieved is especially difficult in this
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now