Utilitarianism Theory Essay Example for Free

Utilitarianism Theory Essay Utilitarianism is a moral theory generally considered to have been founded by Jeremy Bentham, a 19th century English philosopher and social reformer. It is centered on the concept of happiness, and those who seek it. The idea is that all people seek happiness, and that it is the ultimate goal of all human beings to be happy. Therefore, according to classical utilitarianism, when a person wishes to act in an ethically sound manner he or she should strive to bring about the greatest possible amount of happiness for the greatest possible amount of people. This is known as the greatest happiness attitude. Another, similar idea is that a person should always strive, if incapable of producing happiness, to reduce unhappiness. As the theory is wholly focused on the outcome of a person’s actions, it is classed as a â€Å"consequentialist† theory, i.e. a theory that concerns it with consequences and not actions in themselves. Utilitarianism can be seen as a highly mathematical theorem, looking at the total units of happiness that a particular action gives rise to. For instance, I might want to go out and have drinks with some friends and my boyfriend or I could find something more family oriented and do something fun with my son and my boyfriend. Consider that my son is only little for a short time, would I rather have drinks and regret the hang over later or share a memory with my little boy. Taking my son out for a night might add 10 units of happiness to the world’s total stock, whereas going out for drinks would only add a total of 6. Certainly, the latter would make a greater quantity of people happy (the former only benefiting one person), but it is the quantity of happiness produced that is of the first importance to utilitarianists. But let us look more closely at Bentham’s utilitarianism. To understand his approach more fully, it is vital that one come to an appreciation of exactly what he meant by â€Å"happiness†. His ideas here are, really, quite simple. Bentham thought that we should look at happiness as being based on pleasure. Naturally, it follows from this that he also felt that we should treat unhappiness as something consisting of pain. This view on happiness has led his particular brand of utilitarianism to be seen as a hedonistic theory. Furthermore, Bentham did not distinguish between different forms of pleasure. To him, anything that gave rise to happiness – be it drugs or reading – was fundamentally good. Other philosophers have striven to develop Bentham’s  theories further. One of the more notable of these is John Stuart Mill, who sought to distinguish between what he termed â€Å"higher† and â€Å"lower† pleasures. Mill disagreed with Bentham’s all-inclusive view on pleasure, feeling that there was a fundamental difference between the varying forms of pleasure available to people, and that some had a finer quality than others. It was Mill who put forth the notion that it is â€Å"better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied†. Mill’s idea was fairly straightforward, namely that while there are many simple, sensual pleasures in life, such as eating or drinking, there are also certain pleasures which are of a more cerebral nature, such as listening to classical music or reading poetry. According to Mill, these latter pleasures are of a greater quality, and should therefore be considered more important. He posited that someone who has experienced both forms of pleasure would naturally feel inclined to choose the higher pleasures. For instance, a man who is familiar with both tasty food and good poetry would view the latter as something more valuable than the former. This is a fairly straightforward exploration of the most common forms of utilitarianism. The most important thing to remember about these theories is that they are consequentialist and, above all else, that they are concerned with the greater good. Utilitarianists don’t care about your personal agenda or whether your actions happen to hurt some people. As long as the eventual results of your actions lead to more pleasure than pain, you’re in the clear. There were a number of things Mill did to change Utilitarianism. Mill said: â€Å"Better to be a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be a Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.† Mill also linked Utilitarianism with Christian morality. He connected the theory with the teachings of Jesus. He said that the ‘ideal perfection of utilitarian morality’ was abiding by the ‘Golden Rule’-‘Do onto others as you have them do to you.’ This made many more people accept Utilitarianism as it linked with their religion. Rules were introduced into Utilitarianism by Mill. The rules introduced were ones that generally brought about the greatest happiness for the greatest number. For example, Mill argued that society needs the principal of truthfulness as it brings the most happiness on the long run. Utilitarianism is a theory that Christians can relate to. Mill brought it closer to the Christian church by introducing Rule Utilitarianism. This would be closer to the principals Jesus lived by. For  example, it was against the Jewish law to work on the Sabbath but when people were in need, Jesus bent this rule and healed them. The largest connection Christianity has with Utilitarianism is the death of Jesus. He was crucified and died for the sins of mankind-sacrificing himself for the majority. However, Utilitarianism does accept evil where Christianity most certainly does not.

Point of View in Bartleby, the Scrivener Essay -- Herman Melville

Point of View is incorporated in to stories to show the readers how the story is told. It includes describing the position and person in the story. Position is how far the narrator is from everything that is going on in the story. Person is way the narrator shows the character and their attitude. There are four different parts that make up the Point of View. These four parts include: Third-Person Omniscient, Third Person Limited Omniscient, First Person, and the Objective. Third-Person Omniscient is when the author of the story, tells the story as a narrator. They â€Å"know ,† â€Å"speak,† and are able to follow every character in the story. Third-Person Limited Omniscient means that the narrator only knows the thoughts and feelings of one character in the story. The author is still the narrator. First Person is when the author chooses one character to tell the story. You will often see the words, â€Å"I,† and â€Å"me,† through out. The narrator will most likely be in the middle of the action, or telling the story from a past perspective. Lastly, the objective is how the author gets the point across without interpreting the character’s feelings. According to our textbook, â€Å"E-Fictions,† it is similar to â€Å"looking at a story as if the audience were watching it through a camera lens.† Herman Melville uses a first person point of view to show the narrator’s first hand fascination with his employee Bartleby, as well as Bartleby’s strange behavior and insubordination. The lawyer hires Bartleby as his scrivener. He is awestruck because Bartleby is so quick and efficient. He asks Bartleby to help him examine papers and Bartleby replies,† I would prefer not to.† Bartleby’s reply surprised the lawyer. The lawyer repeated himself. ... ... these letters speed to death. Ah, Bartleby! Ah, humanity!† Using first person point of view in this story was a good way to show the readers first hand how the lawyer felt. I don’t think the author could have used any other point of view to explain to the reader how the lawyer felt about Bartleby. If he had used third-person omniscient, it would have pulled away from the narrator, and focused on all of the characters more. If he would have used third-person limited omniscient, we would not have gotten how the other characters in the story felt about Bartleby. Objective would not have worked either, because he wouldn’t really get to see what was going on in the lawyers â€Å"head.† In conclusion, point of view is very pertinent to telling the story. It is how the story is told, and who the story is told by. All of these factors go in to point of view.

Community, Responsibility, and Guilt

Community, Responsibility, and Guilt The novel Chronicle of a Death Foretold by Gabriel Garcia Marquez tells the story of Santiago Nasar's death. More importantly it tells the story of what values and honor mean to a community and to what extent one can go to maintain that standard. A central theme in the novel is how a society can pressurize its people to act and behave in a certain way. They feel bound by a standard that if not kept, then it will bring shame to their family. In the novel, after her husband returns Angela Vicario to her family on their wedding night, she admits that it is Nasar that had aken her virginity.Her brothers, Pablo and Pedro, viscously murder Nasar to regain their sister's and familys honor. In this society a man or woman without honor is an outcast to the community and to the culture. Almost everyone in the community knew what was going to happen but no one did anything about it. Everyone in the community had excuses to why they did nothing to help. Excus es stating that they didn't believe it would really happen or that they Just didn't know what to do. Each person seemed to Just hope that someone else would do it; someone else would stop hem, and didn't want to take responsibility.The novel reflects how a community can victimize individuals within its society causing detrimental affects to both the general public and the specific individuals involved. The novel looks into the Latin American culture and how its cultural norms and the importance of honor effects the entire community. The principles that obligates the Vicario family and the community conducts the murder of a most likely innocent Santiago Nasar and burdens Pedro and Pablo with the duty to defend the family honor.In this culture, honor of a woman's purity does not only belong to the female individually but the honor belongs to the family as well. To not be pure can bring shame on the family name in the eyes of the entire community. So much so that keeping ones honor is more important than been truthful and keeping Godly values. This double standard makes it okay for a women to deceive their husband into thinking that they're virgins. We see this in the novel, page thirty-eight, where Angela is taught old wives tricks to fake her virginity on her wedding night and told that it is ommon that women have to do this.The community consists of both Latin culture and Arab culture ranging for different social classes. However, as stated in the lecture notes, both cultures connect through religion. Both the Latin and Arab cultures in the novel are Catholic. The Catholic religion is very important to all the members of the community. Cultural beliefs, traditions, and rituals form the Catholic Church influence the roles of the family. The novel presents a break down in religion. A break down in religion causes a break down in family values. This is why almost a ouble standard is seen with the communitys values.In the book, the Bishop never comes ashore to giv e his blessing, acting as if he is to good to stand with the people of the community and seems to Just be going through the motions. Another example is how Father Amador is told about the plan to murder Santiago but he never tries to stop it blaming it on being busy and not knowing what to do. If a leader of the church church do it either? The novel stress the importance of the Catholic Church and practicing church tradition, but at the same time there is stress to put all that aside or the sake of honor.To defend ones honor, it is okay to lie and murder as long as it is Just. It is even okay to make excuses for guilt. â€Å"No one even wondered whether Santiago Nasar had been warned, because it seemed impossible to all that he hadn't† (Marquez, p. 20). Everyone had an excuse for why they didn't get involved. They felt they didn't have to do anything because someone else would do it. Another double standard is how men having premarital sex at the brothel or prostitution house seems to be acceptable in the community but a woman having sexual relations efore marriage is what is wrong.The community is collectively thinking. No one is standing up as an individual. So then when everyone decides to stay silent the effects of their actions intern breaks down the community responsibility to its members causing havoc for many of the characters and the public as a whole. Having honor and commitment to the family and community is major theme of the Chronicle of a Death Foretold. Societal responsibility is different for men and women. â€Å"The boys were brought up to be men. The girls had been reared to get married† (p. 31).The community emphasizes a machismo culture. The women are taught to have suffered, be pure and be compliant to men. Men are taught to show and prove their masculinity and to be dominating. Society fails to care for and victimizes Santiago Nasar. However, I feel that the other characters are somewhat victims as well. Santiago, most likel y innocent, is victimized because he is slaughtered for deflowering Angela Vicario. Pedro and Pablo are victims because they are bound by honor and duty to regain their familys honor by killing the man believed to have taken it. So he ut the knife in his hand and dragged him off almost by force in search of their sister's lost honor. â€Å"There's no way out of this,† he told him. â€Å"It's as if it had already happened† (Marquez p. 61). This quote shows how the Vicario brothers are ruled by their cultural beliefs and feel that they have to do the deadly deed to be respected. Other examples are the hypocritical gender differences, which makes Angela a victim; and Bayardo is a victim due to the cultural expectation of having a pure wife and if she is not then he has to return her and face the embarrassment.This victimization of many of the characters is because they are all bound by the rules of their community's culture leaving them with no other outcome. Santiago is easily victimized because he was never told that he was going to be killed. He was a sitting duck unaware of the hidden predators waiting to slaughter him. This victimization was because no one in the community took responsibility and in the end their society felt that the murder was Just due to family duty and the regaining of ones honor.The structure of the story is told by an anonymous narrator who was there at he time of the scandal and returns years later to recollect information of how the murder of Santiago Nasar came to be. The narrator was apart of the community; in the novel the reader is told that he is a friend of Santiago Nasar and many of the other characters and we are told who his family members are as well. The narrator to is guilty like the rest of the community for not taking charge and helping to stop the murder of Nasar. He never mentions himself taking part in the responsibility to save Santiago or stop the Vicario brothers.He portrays the community as being au sing a double standard between genders. Men are masculine and dominate and women are submissive and taught to please the man. Overall he shows how the community's responsibility for each other falls apart. The reader finds out information on Santiagds death and how it came about through a series of ways: directly, indirectly, through associations, and hearing it talked about. In the novel, time Jumps from past to future throughout the five chapters and we are given different accounts of the events from various people in the community reconstructing the details of Santiagds murder.This adds more emotional effects in understanding the community obligations that lead to the murderous deed, but it also leaves the readers with a lot of questions and assumptions. Chronicle of a Death Foretold tells the story of a commun. This novel underscores how religious beliefs and cultures can nurture a warped sense of honor and values. In the novel the characters believe they are doing the right thi ng, but in actuality they go against the values of their religion that they claim is so important. Honor is above all and put above their very sense of right and wrong.

The Challenge As A Progressive Perspective - 1446 Words

The Challenge is to Persuade Glenn Bridgers University of the People . PRINCIPLES OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT BUS 1101 Axel Estable (Instructor) July 29th , 2015 The Challenge is to Persuade I believe there are parts of our society that have become fractured and divided somewhat beyond repair and I think that there is an extent to which doing what is needed takes precedent over gaining the consent to do it. This is what I mean by the challenge is to persuade, I really feel that those people who have been manipulated into working against their best interest simply need to be persuaded to a more progressive viewpoint. And I think they need to be persuaded by seeing the benefits of collective progressive, work, philosophy and†¦show more content†¦You can also define the skill as your ability to change the actions or behaviors of other people, or to encourage the actions and behaviors of others. In a business setting this would be a manager s ability to get his employees to do their work more efficiently; in a relationship this would be the influence to gain compromise from your partner, siblings or children. In the public this would be your ability to negotiate with strangers and foreigners, to get out of bad situations or simply to negotiate better positions for yourself. How the skill could be useful in business In the work environment you do not always have the decision-making autonomy that you need to make your ideas a priority so the ability to persuade others to endorse or advocate for your ideas is a valuable skill. When you re working with others, if you ever take on too much work it would be great to be able to persuade your coworkers to assist you. You may even need to persuade your supervisors or shareholders to give you more time instead of putting you under more pressure. If you are responsible for training customer facing employees in your organization not only do you have to be able to persuade them you need to be able to teach them persuasion in how to work with your organization s customers. You may also need to persuade coworkers and employees to get them more motivated and focused on their work. If you want to grow in your organization you will find yourself constantly persuading the