All humanistic studies are conducted unscientifically. This is a strength of this is that they are less artificial in the way they conduct their studies, this in turn makes the tests more ecologically valid. However a weakness of this is that they have no objective results and they are unable to control variables. This makes causality harder to establish and means psychologists are unable to predict what is going to happen. The humanistic approach represents the ‘healthy half of psychology’ and suggests that we are all with good intentions.
Mustapha Mond tries to make John realize that society in the World State is better off without changes. Mustapha Mond claims “[society] is well off; they’re safe; they’re never ill, they’re not afraid of death,” his statement puts him at odds with what John believes to be an ideal society. Mustapha Mond tries to further enhance his argument by exclaiming how soma is available, should anything go wrong. However, the very irony of soma being available as a back-up plan for any potential mishaps, is in the fact of the possibilities of those potential mishaps occurring in a ‘perfect’ society. Thus, there must be forms of imperfections occurring in the World State.
Morality is not simply about avoiding the wrong, but is also about doing what is virtuous. This theory is secular in the fact that it is non religious and therefore universal as it can be applied to all, and we all strive for happiness. Virtue ethics also values morality for its instrumental worth as when people acquire good habits of character, they are better able to regulate their emotions and their reason. This, in turn, helps us reach morally correct decisions when we are faced with difficult scenarios. Furthermore it emphasises the need for people to break bad habits of character, as they prevent one from achieving full happiness and being a moral person.
Despite leaving the Jesuit, McGirr still believes in selflessness and generosity to find happiness. He views the notion that you need very little physically to be happy. Through even small interpersonal events, he finds “the road to peace” is not a physical destination; it is a state of mind that can be achieved through the experiences that taking life as a journey brings. ‘Wants’, such as excessive jewellery or consumerism in general, will simply “drown [oneself] in [their] own excess”. Both the teachings of
Bad experiences and feelings make the good feelings worth living for. If I were in a constant state of happiness I don’t believe it would be as great as it sounds because I would not be able to experience other emotions. Eudaimonic happiness means that we are happiest when we follow and achieve our goals and develop our unique potentials. Hedonic happiness means that we define the good life in terms of our own personal
Mill explains that utility can be understood in terms of pleasure and the absence of pain and not just by the usefulness of something (Module 7.1). Utilitarianism at its root is maximizing happiness for as many people as possible. “The Greatest Happiness Principle holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness (Mill 14). Meaning Mill’s ethical theory of utility evaluates the moral worth of an action on whether it increases or decreases happiness (Module 7.1). Mill roots the Greatest Happiness Principle in his theory of life.
By doing this, he will not only have to work for a company he dislikes, he will save a lot of lives as well since nobody is going to be smoking Greyarea’s product anymore due to discontinuity. This will also lead to a better and happier society, and that is what utilitarianism is all about. As for being a Deontologist, according to The History of Utilitarianism of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the word deontology comes from the Greek word deon, meaning “duty.” Deontology is the normative ethical position that judges the morality of an action based on the action’s adherence to a rule or rules. It is the ethics of duty where morality is duty-based. If Fred was a deontologist, then he would have no choice but to keep doing the assignments that were assigned to him by the company he is working for because that is his job and he is obligated to them no matter the
According to the “Greatest Happiness Principle,” an action can only be right if it promotes happiness and an action is wrong if it provides the opposite of happiness. Mill’s utilitarian theory believes “all desirable things…are desirable for the pleasure inherent in themselves, or as means to the promotion of pleasure and the prevention of pain.” Applying this theory to life would be an easy task, and one that many would be more than happy to live by. Enjoying a life in which there is nothing better or more attainable than pleasure, to achieve anything that would keep one away from pain and enjoy a simple life of pleasure just like as a common
He was a kid once. George Washington is the pinnacle of what a person can and should be. “Happiness and moral duty are inseparably connected.” George Washington believed that to be happy, you did not so much need things, as you needed to be all that you could be, and do it in a way that helps others. “I walk on untrodden ground. There is scarcely any part of my conduct which may not hereafter be drawn into precedent.” George Washington was not afraid to take a leap of faith, to step in the dark, confident all the while.
Philosopher John Stewart Mill describes utilitarian acts as “…actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Mill, p. 58). Motives for actions do not matter, as long as the result is a positive and desired one. Utilitarianism works upon the happiness principle, which means that for an act to be considered morally justifiable, you must do what maximizes pleasure in your life (Mill, p.58). Although this point of view seems like a great view to live by, it may be flawed, especially when it comes to monetary debt within the community. A flaw that I have come across is that it is difficult to determine exactly what a utilitarian act is.