Assume a hospital has four people whose lives depend upon receiving organ

transplants: a heart, lungs, a kidney, and a liver. If a healthy person wanders into
the hospital, his organs could be harvested to save four lives at the expense of
one life.
1. Applying utilitarianism, what should be done? Why?
 By applying utilitarianism to the situation, it is clear that taking a healthy
person's organs to save the other four people's lives at the cost of one life
is the right thing to do. The morally right behavior that yields the best
overall outcome for the group is utilitarianism, the consequentialist ethical
theory of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Individual rights or the
intrinsic value of each person's life is not a priority of the utilitarianism by
nature; it emphasizes the total result and promotes collective happiness.
This ethical framework expresses that saving four lives while sacrificing one
life might be seen as maximizing the utility or happiness.
2. What is the moral thing to do?
 When we talk about morality based on the scenario, the right course of
action will differ depending on one’s ethical framework, and several ethical
frameworks can provide various results. Because utilitarianism promotes
maximized overall happiness or utility by choosing the greatest good first, it
would suggest harvesting the healthy person’s organs to save the four lives.
It is important to note that many people and ethical systems will consider
this view morally controversial because it goes against recognizing a
person’s right to life and freedom in his body. It would be wrong to take a
healthy person’s organs without his consent from a right-based standpoint
due to violating one’s right and autonomy. The meaning of “moral thing”
can vary greatly depending on the ethical framework one chooses.
Reflection about Utilitarianism.
Utilitarianism, founded by the British philosophers Jeremy Bentham and
John Stuart Mill is a moral philosophy that advocates minimizing suffering and
maximizing total happiness as the ultimate ethical objective. However, it does not
hold the same idea as Egoism, which suggests that the view of a person ought
morally to pursue their own interest. In contrast, utilitarianism focuses on
pursuing pleasure or happiness not for the good of oneself but for as many
human beings as possible. This moral framework encourages us to act in a way
that results in the greatest good for the greatest number of people.
Utilitarianism provides a framework for direct decision-making when
applied to moral dilemmas, such as when a healthy person may save four lives
through organ transplantation at the cost of one life. The possibility exists to save
the lives of four persons who will receive the organs from a healthy person.
However, this vital act loses one life—in the process. The utilitarian philosophy
challenges us to evaluate the effects of our choices and choose the course of
action that maximizes our happiness while minimizing suffering. According to this
viewpoint, saving the majority of people's lives outweighs the pain brought on by
the loss of one life.
However, utilitarianism has its critics as well. One of the main objections to
utilitarianism, the possibility of sacrificing personal rights for the greater good is
shown by the scenario. In this instance, it raises questions about how autonomy
and right to life of person is violated. Critics contend that it is necessary to uphold
each person's rights and dignity, even if doing so reduces the total benefit.
Utilitarianism has a downside when seeking how an action will affect the future.
Several factors must be considered for the results of such a choice, making it
challenging to see them correctly.