Philosophy. Utilitarian Flaws. Life Sciences Essay

Utilitarian
Name:
Institution:
Course:
Date:
Utilitarian Flaws
Jeremy Bentham was a politician and an English philosopher who was mostly known for his view of the Utilitarian philosophy tied to the moral philosophy. His views largely focus on the consequences that actions have. Arising in the eighteenth century, Utilitarianism remains as one of the most persuasive approaches when it comes to the normative ethics within the history of philosophy. While the philosophy is credited to the English philosopher Bentham, some others philosophers have similar ideas, such as David Hume and Francis Hutchinson. This branch of philosophy is based on the idea that the moral worth of any given action taken is solely established by the contribution that is made to the overall utility specifically in maximizing the happiness or the pleasure as it is summed up among all people. The philosophy holds happiness and pleasure as the intrinsic values and pain and suffering are considered invaluable. It is important to note that the moral worth of an action is tied to the consequence of the same and as such end justifies the means (Utilitarianism, 2018).
At the time of the development of the theory, the impact of the same could not have been understated. This is a philosophy that made a significant impact in the modern life and in particular into policy, governance, and business. The aim was to make sure that the actions taken from any decision were geared towards the maximum happiness of the people spreading to the highest number of people. To its credit, the philosophy was quite influential, and he led even with the development of the government policies in the land. This means that every decision that was made was in effect associated with the maximum happiness to the society except a few. It is interesting to note that, this is a philosophy that has continued to impact government policies and decisions to this day. The policymakers understand that it is impossible to have all the people happy and as such, they work towards making the greatest majority, most of the time.
However, this is a philosophy that is also riddled with quite some flaws, especially where it is applied to the general public. It simply does not give way forward (Islam, 2017). When it comes to justice and fairness, this is a philosophy that fails to bring about an amicable solution. For example, terminally ill patients cannot be killed because they are spending money and resources that could be given to other patients. In essence, the terminally ill will eventually die, however, for the good of the majority of patients that could use the person-hours the doctors and nurses spend on them or the money on drugs and equipment spent on them, it still does not justify that they are killed or left to die.
As mentioned above, there is a central idea to the philosophy that calls for the happiness of the many while preceding that of a single person. However, this is to mean that, whenever one is taking action they should never consider themselves and should only make sure that the rest are happy at their expense (Rachels & Rachels, n.d.). It is further complicated by the fact that, there could family members involved and strangers. The most likely results when one is ...