Utilitarianism Theory in Daily Life - Term Paper Example

Utilitarianism Theory The need to understand the root of moral/ethical guidelines has led to the constructions of various theories and models. These guidelines have streamlined human actions and behavior into the acceptable ways that enable individuals to coexist in a more peaceful and just way. Among the many theories that attempt to explain human ethical behaviors and standards, utilitarianism stands out as one of the best that has clearly outlined conceptions about why something is deemed good or bad. In the society, from communication to overall human behavior, ethics works to regulate and steward those actions into the right accepted channels where peace, justice and equality is achieved. This paper aims at evaluating the utilitarianism theory based on its theoretical conceptions and practically relates it to real occurrences evidenced in the contemporary society thereby giving it a holistic approach. This will be done through exploration of various literatures and sources in the databases that have relevant content to the topic. The paper begins with the introduction then proceeds to discuss the theoretical concepts of utilitarianism. Prior to conclusion, a practical real life experience that relates to the theory is studied. At the end, concise conclusive remarks are given as well as the general summary of the discussion Utilitarianism Theory Introduction Every time the world crosses beyond the ethical marks, the result becomes condemnation, uproar and interruption of peaceful coexistence (Gingell, 2013). This means that there are those lines that separate the right from the wrong, the good from the bad and the accepted from the disputed. Human behaviors are controlled by set social rules that guide actions such that those behaviors that are exhibited are justifiably authenticated and verified as pure and healthy in the social discourse. What has puzzled many in the past and even today is extracting the imperatives of these ethical standards. Who makes these ‘social laws’ that make people behave like they do? Under what guidelines or framework would someone struggle to save a life of another when they put their own on the edge? What brings the social order that is sought to be achieved by many societies? In order to understand the principles under which humanity is embedded on, several theories have been put forward. The utilitarianism theory is a consolidated conceptual theoretical perspective that has been embraced over a long period of time because of its comprehensive nature and outright clarity in explaining the mystery behind ethics and morality. Its conceptions can be relevantly be related to the real world occurrences; something that has given it fame and held it in high esteem in the discussions relating to ethical issues. In this essay, utilitarianism theory will be extensively explored and its practical applications based on experienced circumstances be discussed. This will aim at narrowing the theory from its wider theoretical conceptions to its practical contemporaneous instances. Definition of Utilitarianism Theory According to Bykvis (2009), this theory is etiologically constructed from the English word ‘utility’ which describes the usefulness of a given item. In this regard, utilitarianism is the ability of a particular thing to leave up to its expectation and performs what it purports to perform. Utilitarianism theory is a normative ethical principle that states that what is good or right is only acceptable and justified if it works to benefit a larger population. Whatever is ethically right is, therefore, that which serves to maximize the benefits or advantages to larger portion of the community that it touches. Brief History of Utilitarianism Theory This theory is attributed to two main characters who initially established the utilitarian thinking in ethical matters. John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham are renowned ‘Classical Utilitarians’ who focused their philosophical works in understanding the essence of pleasure to human beings and how it drives them into actions. The two gentlemen are credited to have conceived that humans act on the ‘pleasure principle’ in which they seek to improve the benefits they accrue in actions as they decrease any pain that may come along. In their understanding, John Stuart and Bentham explained that people act like they do, and set the rules as they are because the aim to achieve the highest good possible that will benefit a big proportion of the society This conception has had significant impact in the historical ethical philosophy as it has received overwhelming support from various scholars and philosophers both in the ancient and modern times. It was until the 19th century that utilitarianism exploded and conquered the world of ethical philosophy. Its shreds, however, could be seen as early as in the 18th Century going backwards (Barrow, 2010). Conceptual Principle of Utilitarianism Theory In a nutshell, this theory describes ethical standards to be an outcome of the evaluation that people have had concerning the best way to best benefit a larger group in the community. Operating under the principle of ‘greatest happiness’ (maximizing benefits for the highest number of people’), the fundamental basis of conception is that what is right is right because it bring benefits to a bigger number or proportion of people and that which is wrong is so because it probably benefits only an individual or a small group while creating harm to the other larger portion (Bykvist, 2009). One’s on pleasure, therefore, is nothing until it can bring positive consequences to a large mass of people in the society. Until then, that pleasure does not count from an angle of this theory. It, thus, proposes that to operate under moral/ ethical frameworks, a person need to identify and engage in actions that promote great social welfare in the society. Those whose agendas are directed towards causing harm or discomforting the larger society while benefiting themselves are breaching the ethical standards according to this perspective. For example, if corruption and bribery can only benefit am individual politician financially while promoting poverty amongst the citizens, then that automatically becomes an ethical breech as far as this perspective is concerned. However, on the opposite, if a politician engages in some fraud probably stealing from a fellow rich politician to help the society then that is ethically accepted. This perspective operates on the principle of quantity of those who benefit or get harmed by actions in the society (Kolb, 2008). Strengths of Utilitarianism Theory One of the many reasons why this theory has gained great fame and many people have come to support it is because of the straightforwardness as well as precision it shows while explaining human account of right or wrong. It is a concise but comprehensive theory that is based on one principle in an attempt to explain moral/ ethical framework as evidenced. It does not have any ambiguity or mix up of principles that would otherwise bring confuse. The principle that talks about pleasure maximization for a large number is succinct but wide-ranging. Also, the explanations are relevant to the real practical world. The conceptions about human’s endeavors to bring joy and happiness to a majority of people explain why people struggle for their families or for their nations. It is in line with the essence of ‘common sense’ that engages people to operate for a common happiness (Hume, 2006). Consequently, this theory is as well in line with the democratic pursuit as it provides an explanation why a just government would be so concerned about how to maximize benefits for its larger citizens by availing facilities and services such as healthcare, food among others. Issues such as security trade-offs are best understood from this perspective as the government may at times be forced to use power over certain few individuals such as criminals to exterminate them so that the larger population can leave in peace (Spence, 2006). Moreover, actions such as philanthropy, charity work among others that are directed towards benefit a bigger population rather than self-gratification are best covered in this theory. It immaculately entangles well with ‘universal principle’ in which human intent goes beyond the person level to global space (Smith, 2012). Weaknesses and Criticisms of Utilitarianism Theory On the same way this theory recorded strengths and support, it was criticized for a number of issues. First, its conception about the conscious mindful of one’s actions to produce an outcome that benefits a larger population in the society is not accurate. Critics argue that people may sometimes act even without considering the consequence or likely outcome. Individuals may not be in a position to verify certainly the likely result of their outcomes (Timmons, 2013). Second, the theory has also been criticized for its focus on outcome and the basis of verifying morality (Graham, 2010). It implies that good or bad is judged on the basis of the impact it has on the bigger proportion of the society even without checking the process that led to its achievement killing someone to make a population is still morally right. This in practical sense may not be the case as humans tend to abhor such acts even though they had ‘good’ intents of serving the majority. The blind conceptualization that what is good is good because it benefits the majority is not well founded. Practical Application of Utilitarianism Theory A personal experience in which a business organization board got into a moral dilemma in an attempt to go about corporate social responsibility that the company has toward safeguarding their stakeholders would best bring this theory into a practically real circumstance. Jenny & Co., a food producing company that enjoys monopoly in the market and commands a large customer base has it management arguing about whether to ‘unreasonably’ increase the prices of its products or not. This is after the company that was creating stiff competition for Jenny &Co. got closed down due to government policies and regulations of standard production. The company, therefore, has since the competitor’s closure, recorded high improved sales, something that has got its board of directors thinking. The idea, according to the board of directors, is to exploit the customers by excessively hiking the prices so as to generate greater profits. Since no extra cost of production is increased, the profit margin would greatly escalate when prices are increased and this would make the company grow bigger and open more branches in just some few months. A board meeting is, therefore, called and the board of directors and a few top staff consensually agree to implement this decision. However, there are some other staff who are opposed to this decision claiming that it is a ‘real day robbery’ the company will be exercising on its loyal customers and other stakeholders; people who have been with the company during since its initial days. The two staff consisting of the company Chief Executive Officer and the Public Relations Manager are unfalteringly opposed to this idea and threatens to sue the organization is such a decision is implemented. This is based on the fact that a company should work to serve the large population and is obliged to carry out corporate social responsibility of ensuring that it stakeholders are ethically protected. Dr. Edin (CEO) and Mr. Christopher (PR manager) claim that it is unethical for the firm to take advantage of the market situation to exploit the customers by raising the prices for commodities they have bought at the (then) current price for over a decade without price decrease. To the two, this move is against the ethical /moral standards the company swore to abide by and safeguard. Edin and Christopher promised that even if it would cost them their jobs, they must fight and scrap away such bad decisions that would bring pain and miseries to the community. The battle ended when the board reversed their decisions and maintained the prices. Analysis of the Ethical Case at Jenny & Co. in Relation to Utilitarianism Theory As it may be seen, the communication breach between the directors and the staffs who are opposed to the decision to increase prices is brought about by the utilitarian ethical stance of the company CEO and the PR manager. The CEO and the PR manager hold it dearly that it is unethical to impose rules and policies or even actions that will have negative impact on the larger society. The company move to increase prices without proper justification is, therefore, an unethical move that would result to pain as opposed to maximum pleasure. It is this view that makes that two to battle hard to ensure that the company is operating within its moral circles to achieve social responsibility. What is good, therefore, according to the directors is that which satisfies them of which is contrary to Dr. Edin and Mr. Christopher’s’ conceptions. The latter are more concerned about the general societal comfort than few individual’s celebrations and informs their decisions to detest the proposal. Conclusion In conclusion, the basis or criteria of forming what is right or wrong is, according to utilitarianism theory, a conscious process of maximizing pleasure for the majority of the population. It is this idea that drives human into doing good to people as well as acting in a manner that ensure prevalence of peace and prosperity. Utilitarianism theory operates under the fundamental principle of pleasure maximization for the biggest number in the society and what is good is deemed so simply because it brings ‘smiles’ in a large population. The basis of judgment of what is right or wrong, therefore, is established on this conception as proposed by its exponents; John Stuart and Bentham. This theory has had great achievements because of its ability to relate what is happening in the real world such as philanthropy with the hypothetical conceptions it gives. However, it has been criticized for it unrealistic s conceptualization of human actions to be consciously focused on consequences. As , demonstrated in the case study, utilitarianism is an ethical perception that most people use to solve moral dilemmas and make critical decisions in all walks of life including business, political and social frameworks. People’s actions and communication patterns are regulated by the need to create highest value rather than pain to the majority. References Barrow, R. (2010). Plato, utilitarianism and education. London: Routledge. Bykvist, K. (2009). Utilitarianism. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. Gingell, J. (2013). Education and the Common Good. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. Graham, G. (2010). Theories of ethics: An introduction with readings. London: Routledge. Hume, D. (2006). An enquiry concerning the principles of morals. Middlesex, UK: Echo Library. Kolb, R. W. (2008). Encyclopedia of business ethics and society: 5. Los Angeles [u.a.: Sage. Smith, A. (2012). Theory of Moral Sentiments. Dover Publications. Spence, E. (2006). Ethics within reason: A neo-gewirthian approach. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Timmons, M. (2013). Moral theory: An introduction. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Read More