For anyone, this would be a long and complex process and would not lend itself to making decisions at a pace which would then allow time for actual action. Act Utilitarianism requires an agent to consider, at the point of being presented with any dilemma, which of a series of potential actions, would result in the greatest happiness and the least amount of pain. Perhaps one of the most apparent issues is that of time-wasting. Undeniably, if one were to adopt the Act Utilitarian stance, one would be met with numerous points of contention which would require careful thought if one were to defend the chosen viewpoint coherently. At a basic level, Act (sometimes referred to as 'direct') Utilitarianism can be defined as the moral theory which advocates that 'an act is right insofar as its consequences for the general happiness are at least as good as any alternative available to the agent.' For the Act Utilitarian, as Crisp more concisely states, 'the right action is that which maximizes happiness.' For the Rule (or indirect) Utilitarian, the rightness or wrongness of an act is determined not necessarily by whether it promotes the greatest happiness but whether it complies with certain rules which, if everyone were to follow them, would result in the greatest amount of happiness 'An act is right insofar as it conforms to a rule whose acceptance value for the general happiness is at least as great as any alternative rule available to the agent.'
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |