Mill's Utilitarianism - Essay Example

A number of philosophers have studied utilitarianism in order to understand how the principles can affect the daily life actions of a person when it comes to remain under the boundaries of ethics. Ethics are moral values described by the humankind himself pertaining to the need of understanding human rights as well as rights associated to every other object that the human kind interacts. Utilitarianism implies an approach that emphasizes on considering the whole problem a sum of collective parts that make up the problem.

In this way, the approach leading to utilitarianism clearly understands the collective patterns of one problem to understand the need of every component and to alter accordingly. It requires that the outcome of every action be considered before applying the theory; however, in many cases, it continues to change its moral principles, which raises many levels of criticisms with the prevailing theory of principles. The purpose of this essay is to enlighten those areas of criticisms, which explain how this theory of ethics and principles fail at certain levels of morality.

In its true form, utilitarianism cannot exist since it defies the concept of justice fairness and personal integrity. The theory demands too much with its actions and consequences, taking no regard of the promises made by humankind. (Fieser, pg 102-106). Utilitarianism is characterized by a set of components that makes it a theory of principles and morality. The consequentialism, welfaring, and aggregatioanism are the bounding basis for this theory, which constitutes its basic principles. The thesis opinion presented in this regard defies the existence of utilitarianism and the failures of its implementation in the prescribed fields of ethics and principles.

Utilitarianism act fails to define the limit of justice. If the punishment of one person brings in happiness collectively for the society or a few clusters of individual, it is considered as moral. Irrespective of the circumstances of the person or the nature of his actions, utilitarianism proposes punishment to level out the principles of ethics. The rights of an individual are not considered before the benefits of many. This concept does not act in real and defies the theory of utilitarianism since every individual has a set of owned rights, which need to be considered before demanding a collective benefit from his being.

One example sin this regard can explain how present day principles of ethics and morality defy utilitarianism’s concept of justice and fairness. The poor man should have executed for he is homeless and fails to acquire a better living standard (Gehlert & Browne, p. 31). This does not happen in real life as every individual; even the poor man has rights defined as human rights. Utilitarianism does not regard the distinction of individuals. It fails to focus and emphasize on the boundary of every individual, which gives him the distinction of being that person.

What we do is different from allowing something to happen. In no way does this imply any claim on part of an individual unless he is proved to have conducted actions resulting in certain consequences. No one is morally obliged to follow orders of someone if the actions cause uncertainty or clear adverse effects as a result. On the other hand, utilitarianism shows disregard of the consequences. It implies that the order be fulfilled as soon as