Essay on Utilitarianism

 
Utilitarianism frequently employs behaviors that promote an individual's pleasure. It's a kind
of consequentialism where the outcomes of acts are either right or incorrect. It views all
human interests equally.
An activity looks ethically good or bad to utilitarians. Jeremy Bentham was the first to study
utilitarianism. To him, happiness is the only genuine good, and the only truth. Classic
utilitarianism is the name given to Bentham's utilitarianism. According to Bentham, doing the
right thing brought maximum net pleasure.
 
To decide which behavior was ethically acceptable, one added up all units of pleasure and
subtracted all units of despair. Act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism are two modern
utilitarian formulations. Bentham's classic utilitarianism leads to act-utilitarianism. Act-
utilitarianism says that each time an action is chosen, it is distinct from other acts that need
to be computed.
Conversely, rule-utilitarianism is the ethically proper behavior conducted consistently.
Observing these guidelines offers immense joy. Act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism both
aim to produce enjoyment. It is a moral philosophy that suggests maximizing benefit
wherever feasible.
 
Utilitarianism is about caring about everyone capable of suffering and improving their life.
Aims to enhance pleasure and reduce discomfort. This theory states that the consequences
of an activity justify the moral acceptability of means to an aim and that the results of the
actions outweigh all other considerations. According to utilitarianism, sacrificing one
individual to rescue a community is the best option since it maximizes everyone's
happiness.
 
Personal connections are ignored by utilitarianism. Every utilitarian has a responsibility to
aid others regardless of the consequences. Enjoyment or pleasure is the only thing that has
inherent worth, and all behaviors that foster happiness are correct. Everybody's pleasure
matters.
 
In socio-political terms, utilitarianism seeks to improve society as a whole. It uses logic to
decide what is good and bad. It also has restrictions dependent on the scenario. It is the
most ethical option that a person may make in business and trade. If utilitarianism is limited,
it tends to establish a binary construct of mortality. Utilitarianism is black and white. It's
black or white.
 
Provide a utilitarian argument for why parents should not lie to their kids about
Santa.
 
Common sense indicates that lying occurs when deception is said with the purpose to
mislead. As a result, our common-sense concept of a lie focuses on the speaker and his
motives rather than the listener and their expectations. Perhaps more logical is our
instinctive belief that it is occasionally OK to lie when the consequences of speaking the
truth are terrible. So, if someone asks where your mother is and obviously intends to locate
her and kill her, few of us would believe that lying to this person violates our moral
responsibility to disclose the truth. Is it true that disclosing the truth about Santa would
endanger our children more? Hardly! In reality, it seems that the reverse is true. By
spreading this myth, we end up doing more damage than good. In the first case, we
educate our children that they cannot rely on us. They have no reason to trust what the
parent says about other, more essential matters at that point. For example, the youngster
may associate what his or her parents say about God with what they say about Santa. In
the second place, we educate our children that it is OK to lie for no reason. The youngster
learns that the truth is unimportant. So, far from being a harmless "white lie," this is a very
harmful custom.
 
The most prevalent explanation for this conduct is an appeal to the enigma of childhood or
'child-like innocence.' What's wrong with a little magic in your childhood, you may wonder?
Isn't it similar to a youngster believing in Red Riding Hood or the End of the World? The
distinction between these types of scenarios should be evident. In one example, we explain
to the youngster that it is a fable or a fairy tale. In the other situation, we go to great lengths
to mislead the youngster. No one, after all, leaves items out for the Big Bad Wolf. Not just in
the narrative, but also by the parents, Santa Claus is depicted as a genuine person. No
one's parents pretend that Darth Vader exists, but while I was on an aircraft on Christmas
Eve, the PILOT shouted over the intercom that he had detected Santa on the radar!!!! And,
although it is OK to withhold some facts in order to protect a kid, willfully perpetuating a
falsehood is unethical.
 
Thus, both deontological and utilitarian moral theories hold that lying to one's child about
the reality of Santa Claus is unethical. It does more damage than good, and we are failing to
fulfill our obligation to communicate the truth. It's scarcely worth saying that it's also nasty,
which would rule it out under any virtue ethics. This conduct is not sanctioned by any moral
system. We are doing our children and ourselves a big disservice by allowing this lunacy to
continue.