Act-Utilitarianism: Ethics and the Greatest Good Principle

The Fundamentals of Act-Utilitarianism

Act-utilitarianism is a utilitarian theory. It is the belief that an action becomes morally right when it produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Utilitarianism is a theory developed by John Stuart Mill, who was one of the most influential figures in the history of classical liberalism. Mill was a proponent of Utilitarianism, which is known as an ethical philosophy or idea in which the happiness of the greatest number of people in society is considered the greatest good.

Consequentialism and the Hedonist Principle

Utilitarianism is also a version of Consequentialism, which is a theory that the moral and ethical rightness of an action depends on the consequences of that action. The moral status of an act is determined solely by its consequences. According to the theory, if the consequences are good, then the act itself is the right thing to do; if they are bad, then it is the wrong thing to do. Utilitarianism is based on the Hedonist principle, which posits that pleasure is the only thing inherently good.

The Greatest Happiness Principle

Act-utilitarianism follows the Greatest Happiness Principle: the right action is the one which produces the greatest overall happiness (pleasure minus pain) for all concerned.

Justice and the Majority Rule

Justice is focused on maximizing happiness for the majority of people; that is, without taking the minority into account. For example, if to save five lives you have to kill one, then it is considered the right thing to do; therefore, it focuses on the happiness of the majority.

Criticisms of Utilitarian Justice

Furthermore, there are two types of justice: on the one hand, the retributive view, which defends a punishment proportional to the offense, and, on the other hand, the Utilitarian view, which defends that a punishment is just (or right) if it maximizes happiness, regardless of whether it is proportional or whether the punished individual committed the crime. According to its critics, Utilitarianism can imply that we should, in certain situations, treat people unfairly or violate their moral rights. Some critics argue that Utilitarianism "does not take seriously the distinction between persons," and that causes a significant problem.

Applying Utilitarianism to Climate Change

In the CD (Critical Discussion), I will attack the theory from the point of view of climate change. Nowadays, humanity is facing a threat that will shape our future; climate change is already having effects on our planet and its people.