Utilitarianism instructs us to do the best for the total pleasure or happiness of all sentient beings. The goal of it is that we should always dedicate ourselves to making a better world. The following will be explaining the basic of Utilitarianism and its relationship with Consequentialism; how are moral decisions made under the lead of Utilitarianism; consequences that occurred under the serious consideration of the moral theory; and criticism of Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a moral theory and is a form of consequentialism because it focuses on the consequence of our actions. The main argument of Utilitarianism is to best maximize happiness and minizine pain for all sentient beings. Utilitarianism is based on Hedonism, thus good or bad are accompanied by pleasure and pain. Thus, we should take actions that bring us pleasure to gain a good consequence. Another important theory is the difference between intrinsic value and extrinsic value. A thing with intrinsic value is that it has the value by itself, however, a thing with extrinsic value is that it has its value because it caused something. Utilitarianism is chasing after more intrinsic value because its main goal is for more happiness, and happiness is not used to seek for something else we value happiness itself. Utilitarianism is a form of Consequentialism, however, it is distinguished from some consequentialism theories for example Egoism. In other words, Utilitarianism does not assume one's pleasure or pain is more important than others, and as a member of our moral community, we must equally consider all beings that can feel pain, pleasure, happiness, and unhappiness. As a form of Consequentialism, we pay attention to the consequence that a decision brings us. For example, if fifteen people in total and only five people or ten people can be saved then sacrificing five people's life can save ten people's life is the best consequence for Utilitarianism, even if you are the one in the five people's group. In this example, the total happiness that arises from saving ten people's life is greater than the total pain of scarifying five people's life, so it is important to balance between pleasure and pain in Utilitarianism. And get back to the point that all sentient beings need to be equally considered, which means human cannot value our pain more important than animals. In conclusion, Utilitarianism tells us to generate as much good as we can or accumulate as many things with intrinsic value, even if it impacts some people as long as the "good" generated is greater than the "bad". How does Utilitarianism recommend that we make moral decisions? Be sure to use examples to explain To understand how to make moral decisions with a Utilitarianism perspective we need to analyze two important concepts, intrinsic worth and extrinsic worth. Intrinsic worth is something that is good by itself, the value of an object or action does not depend on something. For example, happiness is considered intrinsic worth because it's something good that you cannot use to acquire other things. Extrinsic worth is something that is only good because of the meaning we give to it, it's the value we gave to an object or action. For example, money is considered extrinsic worth because we need it to buy food, house and other life essentials. However, if you are lost on an island by yourself, a thousand dollars means nothing because you are not able to use it. Moral decisions are based on normative theories (analyzing ethically if a situation is "good or bad" and "this is better than that"). For example, if you are in your classroom during a school shooting and someone knocks on the door asking for help, you're not going to open the door because you may be putting people at risk. It's important to know that utilitarianism gives equal consideration to pain and pleasure to all beings. Using the example above, if you see yourself in a shooting situation and your sister is in the classroom next door, you cannot open the door to go look for her because you are being unconsidered with other people's life. According to utilitarianism, people should make moral decisions accordingly to: strive to maximize their happiness and pleasure while minimizing their pain, analyze how their actions affect others, and increase the amount of intrinsic worth, no one's pleasure or pain is more important than anyone else's, equal consideration of pain and pleasure experienced by other beings, act in ways that will mostly maximize pleasure for many beings as possible. Effects of taking utilitarianism seriously: The effects of taking utilitarianism seriously as a moral theory might be both good and bad. The following are some possible effects of using a rigorous utilitarian perspective: Utilitarianism places a strong emphasis on maximizing general pleasure or well-being for the largest possible number of individuals. This might result in a society that puts its citizens' pleasure and health first, possibly leading to laws and other measures that enhance everyone's quality of life. Utilitarianism occasionally calls for the rights or interests of certain people or minority groups to be given up for the sake of the majority. This consequentialist perspective may justify activities that violate individual liberties, which can create ethical questions concerning justice and individual autonomy. Utilitarianism's focus on overall happiness might neglect the distribution of benefits and burdens within society. While the theory aims to maximize happiness for the greatest number, it may overlook the needs and well-being of marginalized or disadvantaged individuals or groups. Utilitarianism tends to prioritize results over concepts like justice or individual rights since it is primarily concerned with consequences. This strategy, according to critics, might result in a disdain for justice, fairness, and the preservation of fundamental rights. Calculations are frequently used in utilitarianism to identify the optimum course of action. This entails considering the advantages and disadvantages of various solutions. People may make better judgements by using the process of calculating and comparing outcomes, which takes into consideration the possible advantages and disadvantages of each option The ethical trade-offs and challenges presented by utilitarianism can be difficult. People often have to make tough decisions that put the group's happiness ahead of their own preferences or rights when competing interests or beliefs exist. The need to balance the larger good against individual liberty or concerns for justice can result in moral conundrums. It's significant to note that utilitarianism comes in a variety of forms and that academics and philosophers have thoroughly discussed its advantages and drawbacks. How utilitarianism is interpreted, used, and balanced with other ethical concerns will determine the results of taking it seriously. One criticism of utilitarianism is the problem of individual rights and justice. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist ethical theory that focuses on maximizing overall happiness or well-being for the most significant number of people. According to utilitarianism, an action's morality by its consequences. Critics argue that utilitarianism may disregard or even violate the rights of individuals in pursuit of the greater good. For example, in a hypothetical scenario, if torturing one innocent person would save the lives of more people, a strict utilitarian would argue that torture is morally justified because it maximizes overall happiness. This approach seems to overlook the inherent value and rights of the tortured individual, leading to concerns about fairness and justice. Furthermore, utilitarianism could lead to the exploitation or sacrifice of minorities or marginalized groups for the benefit of the majority. If the majority derives significant happiness from oppressing or discriminating against a minority, utilitarianism could rationalize such actions as morally acceptable. It raises ethical concerns about protecting individual rights and the potential for tyranny of the majority. Another criticism is the challenge of accurately measuring and comparing happiness or well-being. Utilitarianism requires calculations based on the overall satisfaction or pleasure an action produces. However, determining the amount of joy or well-being resulting from an activity is highly subjective and difficult to quantify. Individuals or groups may have different preferences and values, making it challenging to measure and compare their happiness objectively. It raises questions about the practicality and reliability of utilitarian calculations in real-world ethical decision-making. One criticism of utilitarianism is its potential disregard for individual rights and justice, as it prioritizes maximizing overall happiness or well-being. Additionally, the challenge of accurately measuring and comparing satisfaction poses practical difficulties for implementing utilitarian principles. Here's a more detailed explanation of the criticisms of utilitarianism: 1. Problem of Individual Rights and Justice: Utilitarianism evaluates the morality of an action based on its consequences and the overall happiness it produces. This approach can lead to neglecting or violating individual rights and justice. Critics argue that certain rights are fundamental and should not sacrifice, even if doing so would maximize overall happiness. Utilitarianism may overlook the intrinsic value of each individual and treat them merely as a means to an end. It raises concerns about fairness, justice, and the protection of individual rights. Critics argue that a moral theory should respect and uphold individual rights rather than sacrificing them for the majority's happiness. 2. Exploitation of Minorities: Utilitarianism's focus on maximizing overall happiness can potentially lead to the exploitation or sacrifice of minority or marginalized groups. If the majority derives significant enjoyment or benefit from oppressing or discriminating against a minority, utilitarianism could justify such actions as morally acceptable. It raises ethical concerns about the principle of equal treatment, fairness, and the rights of vulnerable populations. Critics argue that a moral theory should not endorse or rationalize actions that harm specific groups, even if they contribute to overall happiness. 3. Measurement and Comparison of Happiness: Utilitarianism requires measuring and comparing happiness or well-being across individuals or groups. However, accurately quantifying and comparing happiness is a challenging task. Happiness is a subjective and multifaceted concept that differs from person to person. People have different values, preferences, and ways of experiencing happiness. Assigning precise values or weights to happiness is highly subjective and prone to bias. Additionally, utilitarian calculations often predict future consequences, adding further uncertainty and complexity. Critics argue that the practical implementation of utilitarianism becomes problematic due to the difficulties in accurately measuring and comparing happiness. 4. Ignoring Individual Autonomy and Personal Values: Utilitarianism emphasizes the overall happiness or well-being achieved by an action, often disregarding individual autonomy and personal values. Individuals have moral intuitions, beliefs, and goals that may conflict with overall happiness maximization. Critics argue that an ethical theory should respect individual autonomy and allow for the pursuit of personal values as long as they do not harm others. Utilitarianism's focus on maximizing happiness may result in losing personal freedom and individuality. These criticisms highlight some of the concerns raised by critics of utilitarianism. While utilitarianism offers a consequentialist framework for ethical decision-making, it faces challenges when balancing individual rights, justice, and the complexities of measuring and comparing happiness. Can you conclude this article?