Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Rule utilitarianism is a form of utilitarianism that says an action is right as it conforms to a rule that leads to the greatest good, or that "the rightness or wrongness of a particular action is a function of the correctness of the rule of which it is an instance". [1]
Act utilitarianism maintains that an action is right if it maximizes utility; rule utilitarianism maintains that an action is right if it conforms to a rule that maximizes utility. In 1956, Urmson (1953) published an influential article arguing that Mill justified rules on utilitarian principles. [53]
[2] [3] Deontological ethics is commonly contrasted to consequentialism, [4] utilitarianism, [5] virtue ethics, [6] and pragmatic ethics. [7] In this terminology, action is more important than the consequences. The term deontological was first used to describe the current, specialised definition by C. D. Broad in his 1930 book, Five Types of ...
Implicit utilitarian voting tries to approximate the utilitarian rule while letting the voters express only ordinal rankings over candidates. In the context of resource allocation, the utilitarian rule leads to: A particular rule for division of a single homogeneous resource;
Act utilitarianism is a utilitarian theory of ethics that states that a person's act is morally right if and only if it produces the best possible results in that specific situation. Classical utilitarians, including Jeremy Bentham , John Stuart Mill , and Henry Sidgwick , define happiness as pleasure and the absence of pain.
Rule consequentialism is a theory that is sometimes seen as an attempt to reconcile consequentialism with deontology, or rules-based ethics [15] —and in some cases, this is stated as a criticism of rule consequentialism. [16] Like deontology, rule consequentialism holds that moral behavior involves following certain rules. However, rule ...
He defended a version of rule utilitarianism in "Toward a credible form of utilitarianism" (1963) and performed cultural-anthropological studies in Hopi Ethics (1954). In A Theory of the Good and the Right , [ 10 ] Brandt proposed a "reforming definition" of rationality , that one is rational if one's preferences are such that they survive ...
In ethics, Smart was a defender of utilitarianism. Specifically, he defended "extreme", or act utilitarianism, as opposed to "restricted", or rule utilitarianism. The distinction between these two types of ethical theory is explained in his essay Extreme and Restricted Utilitarianism. [14] Smart gave two arguments against rule utilitarianism.