Philosophy: Is It Morally Right to Do a Little Evil for a Greater Good?

1664 Words7 Pages
All our favorite superheroes would seem to have always done the right thing by saving a damsel in distress, stopping a villain or providing food or housing to the poor, right? How about if in order for them to do these things involves them to destroy the city in the process or steal from the rich who have done nothing wrong and have honestly earned their money. Well that leads us to our next question that concerns us all, Is it morally right to do a little evil for a greater good? Many would say yes as well as many would say no. But I personally believe that if the end results was for the greater good, yes I would do some evil. I will be elaborating on arguments for, arguments against and my own personal reflection for this matter. To begin with, many people as well as many philosophers believe that doing a little evil for the greater good is morally the right thing to do. If there are starving, suffering families all over the world and tons of wealthy people not willing to give up their money for selfish reasons then why not take what you need from the wealthy and help out these families, it's not like there's any harm being done. According to philosopher Stuart Rachels, "Each year millions of people die from health problems brought on by malnutrition. Often, those who die are children. Every day, around 22,000 children under the age of 5 die, almost always from preventable causes." Why would we let all these people die when we could save them? This is the essence of the philosophy of Utilitarianism. John Stuart Mill was the leading advocate of utilitarian moral theory. Achieving the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people is certainly an excellent way to evaluate a decision. It is a way to make difficult choices. To just choose what helps the most people is practical and serves the greater good. For example a Hit man or an Assassin, would you
Open Document