Mills vs. Rawls John Stuart Mill’s view on moral decisions rests on the utility associated with an action’s happiness. Mill’s primary belief in the “Greatest Happiness Theory” which can also be called Utilitarianism is that those actions are desirable and right if they tend to promote happiness and pleasure and discourage pain. Mill says that all other things may be valued either for the amount of pleasure they involve, or for how influential they are in leading to pleasure. Human beings experience pleasures natural only to themselves, that animals do not have the capabilities of understanding or experiencing. These “higher” pleasures are higher in quality, but lesser in quantity.
Since the true path to happiness, according to Epictetus, is the attainment of virtue, we can all become happier by improving ourselves, whether morally or intellectually. Furthermore, Epictetus' philosophy of happiness would lead us to live less stressful lives if we came to worry about only that which we can control. Still, while I admire Epictetus and his philosophy, I do not believe that most of us could be happy purely through the attainment of virtue. I believe that social support and some level of material possessions are necessary for happiness; we cannot forever strive only for virtue. I do, however, believe that Epictetus had a strong point when he asserted that we should only, rationally-speaking, worry about what we can change -- what good is there in worrying about things we cannot
A firm’s value depends on the positive net income generated in the past. True False A firm’s value depends on the firm’s ability to generate positive cash flows now and in the future True False When determining the value of a firm, which of the following statements is true? • Inversters are risk neutral. Other things equal they prefer to pay more stocks that are less risky and have uncertain cash flows • Investers love risk. Other things equal they prefer to pay more for stocks that are more risky and have uncertain cash flows.
This implies that an act is right if it minimizes violation of a certain moral right thus no one should violate moral rights for happiness sake and be justified. But consequentialism assumes that an act can only be right if its absolute outcome is the best. This implies that an act is only right if the outcome minimizes pain and maximizes happiness. Consequentialists and Utilitarianism consider distribution differently. Utilitarians believe that fairness is a better approach but consequentialists assume that the overall amount of good matters even if only a
The principle of utility also advocates that, the correctness or incorrectness of a deed is dependent on the ability for the action to lead to joy or sadness. If an action aims at supporting pleasure and preventing pain, then it rhymes to this principle, and it is morally right. On the contrary, if it does not aim at promoting happiness or preventing pain, then it does not match to the principle of utility, and it is morally incorrect. This principle is argued to be the morally correct principle of deeds at all situations. The principle of utility continually states that morally right actions produce happiness for all the affected people whose concerns are involved in the picture.
Deontology is the theory that an individual does something because the individual believes it is the right thing to do. They do not look further into the action or bring the possible consequences to mind. They simply believe it is the correct thing to do and act upon it. Deontology is similar to Utilitarianism because it is again based on singular decisions of an individual. Utilitarianism and Deontology are more of a structured belief or theory while virtue theory is more flexible.
It also breaks down motivation into three different categories: intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and amotivation. Intrinsic motivation is the most self-determined form of motivation and behavior (McDavid, Cox, & Amorose, 2012). Intrinsic motivation is a person doing something for themselves because they enjoy it or makes them feel better. Extrinsic motivation is less self-determined and behavior occurs due to reasons outside the action (McDavid, Cox, & Amorose, 2012). An activity done by extrinsic motivation may not be done because a person enjoys it, it’s often done because they want the end outcome.
“We should consider the intensity, duration, certainty or uncertainty, propinquity or remoteness, fecundity, and purity of the value in question for each person affected. A more intense pleasure, for instance, might have to be weighed against a less intense but longer lasting pain. In making our calculation, we give greater weight to the pleasure or other value we are more certain of attaining, and less weight to less certain values.” (De George, page 46) We should ultimately choose what brings us and others, and those most directly affected by the action, the most pleasure or happiness. After determining our decision’s impact to ourselves and others, we come to our final conclusion which determines the morality of the action. If the action produces happy and good consequences versus bad, then it’s the morally right action to follow.
I will analyze my argument through a utilitarian point of view and try to demonstrate why it should be legalized. First off, to be able to understand my argument one must be able to understand the point of view of that of a utilitarian. To make it short and simple for a utilitarian happiness is consequently the result of an action, and if that action produces the greatest pleasure then that action is morally right. Also if the driven action lessens pain and or lessens suffering, then that action is absolutely permissible (And if it is the action that results in the most happiness total, then it is not just permissible, but obligatory.). Knowing this, Cannabis causes millions of Americans pleasure, pain relief, and undeniably is a passed time to “Stoners.” So, why is Cannabis illegal if it is said to have so many benefits?
Hedonia means happiness is the polar opposite of suffering; the presence of happiness indicates the absence of pain. Because of this, hedonists believe that the purpose of life is to maximize happiness, which minimizes misery. Eudemonia defines happiness as the pursuit of becoming a better person. Eudaimonists do this by challenging themselves intellectually or by engaging in activities that make them spiritually richer people. The main distinction between these two is that hedonia uses the idea that happiness is achieved by external things whereas eudaimonia believes that happiness comes from within us.