Principles of Utilitarianism

Descriptive Analysis The main principle of utility consists in achieving pleasure from life and avoiding pain and suffering. Pain and pleasure are the only instruments that allow a people to define what they should do, as well as govern their actions.Advertising We will write a custom critical writing sample on Principles of Utilitarianism specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More These two principles serve as the measurement of right and wrong, as well as the identifiers of cause-and-effect chain (Bentham 457). At this point, the utilitarian theory is also associated with the tools that can provide individuals and community with happiness through recognition of felicity as the foundation of all human actions. The main purpose of utilitarian theory also lies in either increasing or reducing the happiness of an individual at issue. In the majority of cases, the theory acknowledges the community’s interest as the major purpose. Pleasu re can be presented to greater or lesser degree in terms of its intensity, duration, remoteness, and happiness. According to Mill, â€Å"actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong they tend to produce the reverse of happiness† (461). The theorist identifies happiness with pleasure and freedom from pain. Pleasures can originate from broader contexts in terms of both quality and quantity. Additionally, it is suggested that utilitarianism correlates with the natural sense deriving from people’s social nature. Consequently, in case society embraces the principles of utility from an ethical perspective, people can internalize these rules as a foundation for morale. The only thing that people desire is happiness and, therefore, it should build the basis of morale and ethics. All objects and processes in which people are involved serve as means for achieving happiness and pleasure. Finally, utility also focuses on sense of justice that endows peo ple with the right to happiness. To attain happiness and pleasure, a human should cultivate only noble character traits that will contribute to his/her intellectual and cultural growth. The theorists insist that utilitarianism imposes sanctions similar to other moral systems. The sanctions can imply both internal and external dimensions. External sanctions are availably to the human agent from beyond, such as the divine pleasure, or the society’s approval or disapproval. Internal sanctions are composed of feelings creating discomfort when human’s actions oppose the internal duty.Advertising Looking for critical writing on philosophy? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More At this point, both sanctions control the development of right standards for achieving pleasure and happiness. Finally, it is also argued that the morality and ethics of actions should be justified as soon as they are directed at achieving happiness. H owever, to prove that happiness is morally justified, it is necessary to demonstrate that individuals never strive to achieve anything except for happiness. Additionally, people indeed desire such things as virtue that is closely associated with happiness. Assessment The articles expand on the discussion and evaluation of pleasure and happiness. Specifically, the theorists argue that happiness premises on higher faculties and, therefore, should be highly appraised. The meaning of happiness should be expanded to various forms of pleasure. In this respect, a possible objection to the principle of utility arises in terms of the major components of happiness. Utilitarianism also insists that happiness is composed of many experiences and virtues that people appraise. From an individual perspective, the main controversy concerns the idea that human desire constitutes the only motivation for actions. Nevertheless, the rightfulness of action is often measured by subjective evaluation of an individual and the surrounding people. However, such a perspective contradicts the theory of justice that refers directly to the discussion of rights. According to the principle of utility, the right implies that a person has a reason for the community to protect him/her against violations. The centre of debates relies on the criticism of considering the concept of right and justice in the context of utilitarianism. Nevertheless, the rights should be an integral component of utility because violating the rights of other individuals in the community will not contribute to its happiness. From a social perspective, justice constitutes the basis of utilize because the sense of justice is rooted in human’s actions. A person desire to punish another person for the harmful action he/she committed. Such a decisions stems from the feeling of self-defense, which is also considered as a moral one because lack of protection does not imply happiness and freedom from pain. Despite the fact that human rights are conceptualized in the principle of utility, there is a big controversy on this issue. Specifically, the rights are not grounded in human nature; rather, they are premised on utility because they are important for sustaining human culture and well-being. At this point, rights are crucial for achieving the greatest happiness, and people must introduce laws and restrictions that can make people observe these rights. In this respect, the proposed readings provide a profound account and analysis of the main aspects of utilitarianism, as well as how it describes human actions. Additionally, pursuing happiness as the major purpose of human existence is also justified in terms of ethics and morale because they are needed to respect other people’s rights to happiness and pleasure.Advertising We will write a custom critical writing sample on Principles of Utilitarianism specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Works C ited Bentham, Jeremy. â€Å"Principle of Utility†. Introduction to Philosophy: Classical and Contemporary Readings. Eds. John Perry and Michael Bratman. UK: Oxford University Press. 1998. 457-460. Print. Mill, John Stuart. â€Å"Utilitarianism†. Introduction to Philosophy: Classical and Contemporary Readings. Eds. John Perry and Michael Bratman. UK: Oxford University Press. 1998. 460-467. Print. This critical writing on Principles of Utilitarianism was written and submitted by user Skyler Miles to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

UK Position Paper Free Trade

UK Position Paper Free Trade UK Position Paper Free Trade Committee: Global Economics Topic: Free Trade Country: United Kingdom Free trade is when one country lowers, or removes, their trade tariffs and gives subsidies on exports and imports to other countries. Free trade is supposed to be a tool used by countries to obtain resources that are scarce in their country while making the most of the local resources that are available. Instead, large corporations in developed countries who mass produce goods use the free trade agreements of lower tariffs and subsidies to sell their goods in third world countries, which hurts local businesses. This results in an unequal distribution of wealth because the developed nations will exercise a protectionist policy when it come to agricultural trade, which happens to be third countries’ biggest export. These protectionist policies make it hard for third world nations to compete equally in the global market, and thus occurs the conflict of viewpoints on free trade. The first cause of this problem is the fact that third world countries strongly believe in the protectionist view on trade. This is because smaller third world nations know that the only way their domestic economy can grow is by limiting, or eliminating, foreign competition. By radically increasing the tariffs for imports in their country, this will decrease the international competition faced by local manufacturers, and will allow the the local economies to grow, thus increasing the country’s GDP and strengthening their economy. These countries are aware that with no tariffs large multinational corporations can come in and monopolize the market of their choosing, and that small local businesses are the only way their economy can grow. Developed nations also have caused problems with free trade by overemphasizing its importance. They often times blame the fact that third nations have not lowered their tariffs, and this is why their economy is so stagnant. But when third world countries open up their trading boundaries, large countries like the USA take advantage of these low tariffs. A 2002 study showed that the US exported wheat 43% below its production cost, creating tough competition for local farmers. This low export price faced from the US is what allows them to sell their goods at such a low price in the international markets, which consequently hinders the growth of local businesses and the overall economic growth of the country. The UN is in cooperation with the World Trade Organization to help moderate free trade negotiations between countries. In July 2009, the UN wanted to â€Å"resist all protectionist tendencies and rectify any protectionist measures already taken,† which shows that the UN leans towards a more free trading style between countries. They have mediated several hundred negotiations in the past such as NAFTA and other large international trade agreements. The UK strongly supports the concept of free trade as much of our economic strength depends on our trading relations with other countries. As a member of the European Union and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership the UK notes that strong economic ties with countries all over the world is the best way for an economy to grow. Countries can benefit from trade and investment with other countries while specializing in a specific good to export to other nations, thus increasing domestic production rates and strengthening the economy. A country like Iraq is

Summary response essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Summary response - Essay Example The Fourth Trust is a memoir of Dr. Jane Goodall that elaborates how her childhood experience in caring for all sorts of animals taught her important values in life such as respect and care for nature. The basic tenet of Dr. Goodall’s philosophy comes from this statement â€Å"Children’ relationship to animals then can be a means of teaching compassion and kindness† ( Jane Goodall and Mark Bekoff, The Fourth Trust,p.69). Even as a young child, Dr. Goodall learned about compassion by actively engaging with her natural surroundings. Living in apartment never stifled her interests for creatures as she kept a dog in their apartment. As soon as their family moved to a house with a backyard, she pursued her dream of caring for whatever animal needed her attention. Even her little misdemeanor that called the police into her house was the result of her curiosity about where eggs really come from. The Fourth Trust tells us that children who were exposed to animals â€Å"tend to be kind to animals as adults and to be loving and compassionate individuals â€Å"(Goodall and Bekoff, p.68). A concrete example of this was the case of the orphan named Peter. The child’s first experience with the white rabbit taught him a different perspective in life. He suddenly became concerned about the rabbit by asking if it was hurt when he stroked it. If all children coming from disadvantaged families have the chance to interact with creatures in a loving manner, perhaps, they can become more kind to other humans as well. An animal is a creature not capable of fighting back to a human being unless it is a wild animal of course. People learn tolerance and respect when they do not abuse their power and pick on weaker beings. Because of this situation, Dr. Goodall made it her life’s mission to spread to the world her philosophy. The dream became true when teen-agers in her community expressed their

How Chrisianity religion in a way protecting world enivornment (how it Research Paper

How Chrisianity religion in a way protecting world enivornment (how it relate to ecology) - Research Paper Example spiritually and socially bound with God and with each other respectively in a culture where coexistence with nature or the rest of creation on Earth inevitably essential. This simultaneous connection with the environment and God, an entirely unseen supreme entity known to be the Creator and is above all creation, undoubtedly bore huge impact in the process of establishing human civilization. At the dawning of the environmental movement, optimistic attitude by people seemed sufficient in dealing with the issues of the environment so they initiated planting trees, tidying up waterways and various streams, setting up parks, and fixing highways for safety while maintaining some aesthetic value for men to utilize attraction as a means to draw mature concern for the ecosystem. Ideals and sentiments, however, have become affected by factors that are quite significant to industrial advancements and general modernization as well as consumerism which operate at the rate that may not be suppressed even if legislation by authority was imposed. Though scientific endeavor has been considered to remedy ecological problems, the latter’s condition continue to worsen instead. A collection of scientists from different nations with Nobel-acclaimed laureates necessitated a warning to humanity: â€Å"Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course. Human activities inflict harsh and often irreversible damage on the environment and on critical resources. If not checked, many of our current practices put at serious risk the future that we wish for human society – and may so alter the living world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner that we know. Fundamental changes are urgent if we are to avoid the collision our present course will bring about.† Apparently, even with the collaboration of science, a lack of conviction for something higher than the prevailing cause and something of profound intrinsic value serves to make humanity realize that spiritual

Perception Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Perception - Research Paper Example Many individuals mistake these two separate entities as one in the same. This paper will distinguish the difference between the two and provide clarity of each one’s function. This paper will also define how we as individuals acquire a cultural sense of sensation and perception through our experiences. This paper will define terms that will help you understand the history behind the functions of sensation and perception. The research in this paper will define abnormalities that can affect sensation and perception and the effects of those abnormalities as well as medical research and breakthroughs. Perception and Sensing of Our Everyday Environment Perception and Sensation though working together are different entities performing different functions. The functions performed by both perception and sensation are important to the interpretation of how we experience everyday life in the world around us. Sensation and perception are answerable to the brain. The brain is like a telep hone pole and sensation and perception are some of the wires plugged into it to communicate. Perception and sensation to diffuse the confusion honed by most must be described and defined individually. Let’s begin by first defining sensation and describing sensations functions. Myers (2009) observes or defines sensation as the process by which our sensory receptors and nervous system receive and represent stimulus energies from our environment. So what does this mean in laymen’s terms? Basically sensation is the signal we send to our brain that represents our physical experiences in this world we live in. Sensation receptors are recognized by the brain through receiving input up to the brain, which the brain interprets and sends out. There are several interpretation methods that we know as the senses. The five senses are vision, hearing, tasting, touching and smelling. These five senses are used on a daily basis and play very important roles in our everyday lives. Witho ut the use of the five senses, the function of sensation would not exist in our world. Vision is the way we see and interpret the world around us. Vision occurs through the eyes. The eyes have several components that receive and send out light to form visual images. The eye contains several parts, the cornea, the iris, the pupil, the lens, the retina, the fovea, the rods and cones, and the optic nerve to name a few. For the sake of the length of research I will only cover a few parts to give the summarization of the eye’s function and how it transmits to the brain. The parts of the eye that will be discussed are the retina, the rods and the cones and the optic nerve. The â€Å"retina is the light-sensitive inner surface of the eye, containing the receptor rods and cones plus layers of neurons that begin the processing of visual information† (Myers, 2009) The â€Å"rods are the retinal receptors that detect black, white, and gray; necessary for peripheral and twilight vision, when cones don’t respond† (Myers, 2009) The â€Å"cones are retinal receptor cells that are concentrated near the center of the retinal that function in daylight or in well-lit conditions. The cones detect fine detail and give rise to color sensations† (Myers, 2009) The â€Å"optic nerve is the nerve that carries neural impulses from the eye to the brain† (Myers, 2009) So basically when putting all these functions together here is what happens. Once light enters the eye through the cornea, the retina processes the light through

Samuel Clarkes Cosmological Argument

Samuel Clarkes Cosmological Argument In this essay I will show that while Clarke makes a strong claim that our experience establishes the existence of chains of dependent beings, and that the chain must be (a) caused by an aprioi cause or be an aspect of an infinite continuation of contingent beings which begins with a necessary/independent being; the argument does not justify the possibility of an independent, contingent deity that caused the universe. This conclusion will be supported by a string of critiques and a discussion of the arguments objections. The Argument Philosopher Samuel Clarke put forth a modern formulation of the cosmological argument taking a slightly different path than Aquinass famous cosmological argument. But like Aquinas, Clarke adopts the premise that all beings that we encounter must have causes. Contrary to Aquinas, Clarke differentiates between contingent and necessary beings. The contrast he draws is such that if a being owes its existence to a cause then it is dependent; otherwise it is independent. Our experience shows us that there are chains of dependent beings, but, as Clarke points out, they must either (1) be caused by a necessary being or (2) be an aspect of an infinite continuation of contingent beings which, as Clarke explains, either begins with a necessary/independent being or is part of an infinite series which exhausts the possible logical origins for any continuation of beings. According to the above argument, if all continuations of contingent beings must be infinite or start with a necessary being, then Clarke, simply, is able to falsify infinte continuations and hence demonstrate the existence of an independant being. He calls the concept of infinite continuations absurd, as he follows another route to argue for a necessary being. Clarke points out that the series, as a whole, of dependent beings requires an explanation. Since every individual entity of the series is contingent, the entire series taken as a single entity is contingent. Suppose, Clarke further explains, we take the set of dependent beings as part of a long series where each entity is depends on some previous entity for existence. Then the whole series contingent. But the series cannot be contingent on something outside the set of contingent beings. Thus, Clarke argues, there must exist an independant being to cause the series. Criticisms and Objections The existence of an entity can be explained in three ways: (1) It may be explained by another being, (2) it might be explained by itself, or (3) it may be explained by nothing. Now, the first two cases are accounted for in Clarkes argument. Part (1) is a dependent being. Part (2) is an independent being. But part (3) is not accounted for in Clarkes argument. This point is not sufficent to prove the soundness of the argument. Because it is possible that every existent entity depends on another in an infinte continuation of contingent beings. If this is true, every member of the series is accounted for and to explain the existence of the series, we must suppose an independent being. This leads to the conclusion that Clarkes argument is only as good as his premise every being requires a cause. Whether we accept that premise or not is a controversial topic. One could say that the premise is doubtful and not obvious at all. Also, one may argue that the premise is just an assumption that people make, this cannot be taken as a truth. This leads to the premise being questionable and then, by extension, so is the argument. If, according to Clarke, there is cause for every existence, then one could object that what is the cause of the independent, contingent deity? Another objection to the argument could be that, necessary existence has no meaning. If there were a necessarily existent being, it could be possible that the universe itself is that necessarily existent, independent, being, removing any need for a contingent deity as cause of the universe. Why is it not possible that the universe exists and always will from an infinite series of expansions, such as the big bang, and contractions? Even if we suppose that there is an independent, contingent, being, the cosmological argument is lacking of all properties that humans attribute to the first cause of any religion. Clarkes argument would be stronger if he ascribed the characteristics of our portrayal of God (all-good, all-knowing, all-powerful, etc) to his independent being. Also, an infinite chain of objects, each caused by the prior object, does not require any explanation; the chain is explained by the conjoined explanation of its parts. Say we observe a continual stream of vehicles on a street and we are capable of explaining why each vehicle in the stream was there. The first vehicle bound towards work; the second vehicles destination is the mall, and so forth. It does not make sense to ask why there is a stream of vehicles on the street at all. Explaining each individual part of the stream suffices to explain the whole stream.2 Conclusion In sum, Clarkes modern formulation of the cosmological argument proves to be as strong as his principal premise all beings must have causes; and the acceptance of such a premise is arguable. The argument fails to stand up against the stream of objections and criticisms. Clarke does not sufficiently justify his claim that a collection of dependent beings is itself independent in his argument. William Rowe tried to strengthen and clarify Clarkes account by explaining the role of principal of sufficient reason in the argument, but concludes that the cosmological argument is only as strong as the principal of sufficient reason. Thus, the status of the argument remains uncertain.

Double Vision :: Personal Narrative Writing

Double Vision We met at Astor Place. I said hello, she said hi. Her face was the same as I remembered. It was a Sunday afternoon in autumn, and the wind made her cheeks rosy. She smiled curiously. Looking back, maybe it was less the wind and more the circumstances. It had been quite sometime since our last encounter, two months, if my memory served me. â€Å"Shall we,† I said leading the way. Down the stairs of the subway station we passed through the turnstile, I first, then she. Subway’s no way for a good man to go down, rich man won’t ride and the hobo he can drown. Waiting for the 6 train I began to fidget, as Elton John’s lyrics bounced back and forth in my mind. She attempted to talk over the roar of the uptown train. â€Å"How was your summer?† she loudly inquired. And I thank the lord â€Å"Is that what you really want to ask?† I shouted back. for the people I have found. She turned her head and nodded, as the train rolled to a stop. The doors opened and the people poured out, filling the platform. Her body backed into mine, and a faint, familiar fragrance swept through me. Time stood as the aroma lingered. A heartbeat later we were fighting our way through the entanglement. Entering the passenger car, we managed to find an empty seat. The smell of her hair. I remembered that, I remembered the morning after finding my face softly nestled in a pillow of blonde, breathing her in. She had yet to wake, and the sun rising through her barred apartment windows painted crisscrossing patterns on her exposed back. â€Å"14TH STREETUNION SQUARE. THIS IS A BRONX BOUND 6 TRAIN, NEXT STOP 23RD STREET.† The mechanical voice stole me back to the present. Gathering myself I apologized to her. â€Å"Whatever for?† she asked. â€Å"I’m not quite myself today, I, um, I seem to have lost my words†¦Ã¢â‚¬  I trailed off watching the child in the seat across from me wriggle in the arms of his mother, fighting for his freedom, the mother’s face a picture of exhaustion. â€Å"Don’t give it a second thought, sometimes it’s nice to be alone, alone with someone else,† she said. Through the reflection in the window in front of me, I stole a glance at her face as she spoke those last words.