Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In ethical philosophy, utilitarianism is a family of normative ethical theories that prescribe actions that maximize happiness and well-being for the affected individuals. [1] [2] In other words, utilitarian ideas encourage actions that lead to the greatest good for the greatest number.
The problem lies with squaring utilitarianism with egoism. Sidgwick believes that the basic principles of egoism (“Pursue your own greatest happiness”) and utilitarianism (“Promote the general happiness”) are both self-evident. Like many previous moralists, he argues that self-interest and morality coincide in the great majority of cases.
Utilitarian design is an art concept that argues for the products to be designed based on the utility (as opposed to the "contemplated pleasure" of aesthetical value). For example, an object intended for a narrow and practical purpose does not need to be aesthetically pleasing, but it must be effective for its task [1] and inexpensive: a steel power pylon carries electric wires just as well as ...
Negative utilitarianism is a form of negative consequentialism that can be described as the view that people should minimize the total amount of aggregate suffering, or that they should minimize suffering and then, secondarily, maximize the total amount of happiness.
Prior to the coining of the term "consequentialism" by G. E. M. Anscombe in 1958 [11] and the adoption of that term in the literature that followed, utilitarianism was the generic term for consequentialism, referring to all theories that promoted maximizing any form of utility, not just those that promoted maximizing happiness.
Utilitarianism is an 1861 essay written by English philosopher and economist John Stuart Mill, considered to be a classic exposition and defense of utilitarianism in ethics. It was originally published as a series of three separate articles in Fraser's Magazine in 1861 before it was collected and reprinted as a single work in 1863. [ 1 ]
Sidgwick summarizes his position in ethics as utilitarianism "on an Intuitional basis". [10] This reflects, and disputes, the rivalry then felt among British philosophers between the philosophies of utilitarianism and ethical intuitionism, which is illustrated, for example, by John Stuart Mill's criticism of ethical intuitionism in the first chapter of his book Utilitarianism.
These are an adaptation of utilitarianism; an adaptation of John Rawls' theory; [6] an argument from evolutionary theory; [10] and a 'Sherlock Holmes' approach. All four arguments converge on empathy , obligation and the ‘Help Principle’, which the book argues are kernels of a viable ethical system. [ 8 ]