The approach that I strongly agree with is the John Stuart Mill’s doctrine and Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a moral approach that believes ” the supreme principle of morality is to produce as much happiness as possible”(118). Utilitarianism evaluates the right action according to the amount of happiness and absence of pain. In addition,“there is in reality nothing desired except happiness”(118). The right action should result the most desirable happiness as many people as possible.
I choose this moral theory because, I believe if people act by this approach, all wars, conflicts, cruelties, and unkindness will disappear because the action is right that causes happiness and none of those actions results are happiness. Therefore, by following the Utilitarian principle, we are able to live in the peaceful and calm world. In fact the key point to reach peace for all people of the world is happiness and rejecting all heartless, unfriendly, and painful actions. Utilitarianism theory believes happiness for maximum amount of people and has the highest moral value. `
Happiness is desirable and the only thing desirable as an end, all other things being only desirable as means to that end“(126). Utilitarianism theory is a logical theory that answers ethical problems based on desirable happiness. In the other word, I choose utilitarianism because, it helps to increase the amount of pleasure and happiness and decrease the amount of pain, sorrow, and unhappiness in the world. By a utilitarianism approach we can make a better world for all human beings. Utilitarianism theory provides a rational and strong foundation to evaluate the moral worth of an action.
It improves the unity of the all people of the world. Utilitarianism’s theory resolves the relativism theory problems. Relativism believes that the different things are true for different people, and a practice of a wrong action may is not a wrong action in another culture. According to utilitarianism’s theory the action has a moral worth that provides the higher happiness among the most people. Therefore the cultures can eliminate the differentials and the wrong action that causes pain in another culture. Utilitarianism allows cultures make progress and come closer to each other and it helps to improve more peace among the nations.
The most significant argument against utilitarianism is that in some circumstances, it presents the wrong answers to the moral questions. Opponents claim that utilitarianism gives permission for actions that are morally wrong. For instance: according to utilitarianism a doctor can kill a healthy person and uses his organs to save five other people’s lives. The response is killing a healthy person is not morally right as general low but, there are situations that “may be right to sacrifice one person for the good of the whole ” (136).
The other objection is that utilitarianism is too demanding. People should ignore their benefits to help improving strangers. The response is people should not to worry much about the needs of those not in our primary circle” (133). The other objection is about the actions that are not predictable or the result is not easy to find. The response is, it’s not hard to predict the possible result of an action and as general low every action or decision should produce happiness as much as possible. Personally, I prefer happiness as a consequence for all my actions.
When I face with a dilemma or a challenge, the first thing that guides me to take a right decision is the amount of happiness as a result. For instance, recently I faced with a serious dilemma about quitting the nursing field or not. I really enjoy helping other people to reach their health and happiness back, but I feel I am not physically strong enough to do my duties in this job. I decided to stay in this field and educate more because I have a passion on this job and I can reach the maximum desirable happiness for myself and also the maximum happiness for many other people.
Kant’s theory of morality argues that“the moral worth of an action is to be judged not by its consequences, but by the nature of the maxim or principle of an action” (102). He illustrates that the principle or the maxim behind an action has moral worth to evaluate that action. These principles are valuable when can serve as a universal law. According to universal law, the principles have moral value that is applicable to every person without any exception and ought to work in all situations.
Therefore, the followers of Kent’s approach determine the accuracy of an action by evaluating the principles behind that action that it morally should be acceptable. Kant explains about the categorical imperative and its effect on the person’s actions. The categorical’s principle guides people what to do at all events, regardless of what they like to do or want to do. Imperative is a command of reason behind the action that a person has to do it and categorical means that action must be true at all times, and in all circumstances without exception.
In the other word, Kant’s Categorical Imperative says that a person’s action should be a good as itself, not as a mean to obtain something else. Furthermore, the principle or maxim behind the action should work as universal law, and every single person could follow that law. Kant believes that people should concern the principle and maxim that leads to an action. People need to act based on moral law or duty and should not decide to act based on their tendencies or impulses. John Stuart Mill’s moral approach concentrates on the consequences and the result of an action.
Mill believes that an action is right and permissible when it causes the best consequence compared to its other choices or alternatives. Mill’s theory defenses utilitarianism that is the greatest happiness possible. Mill explains that the supreme principle of morality is the act that can produces as much happiness as possible, each person counting equally (118). According to his ethical theory, the only desirable and worthy thing at the end is degree of pleasure or happiness and freedom of pain.
Mill points out that some types of pleasure are more valuable than others and mental pleasures have higher value compare with the bodily pleasures. There are two types of utilitarianism. 1- Act utilitarian that focuses on the effects of individual actions 2- rule utilitarian that focuses on the effects of types of actions. In fact, followers of utilitarianism find the right action by evaluating the sequences of that action and the total amount happiness. Aristotle’s moral doctrine is about “‘The Nature of Virtue (139).
He explains that every action should enable a person to obtain some good and happiness. “Happiness is a chief good” (139). Therefore, happiness is an excellent and it’s above the all other good. Aristotle explains that origins of morality come from human nature and human have potential to live well. That means to live with virtuous and this virtuous obtains by habit. A human can be a good person with doing well frequently or constantly. He illustrates that there are two kinds of virtue: 1- Intellectual virtue which people learn from teaching and experience and time are essential elements of that.
Moral virtue which people do because of doing habits. He explains that when people need to determine what action is reasonable or is a right action they should act according to virtuous. The virtue is a mean between two extremes and the right action is something between too excess and too deficiency, because excess and defect, both can destroy the goodness of that action. People cannot become good just by understanding what virtue is. People can be virtuous when their character makes them good, and they capable of doing good.