Jaws

Utilitarianism has been around in some form or another or nearly 2500 years when the ancient Greeks first came up with the ethical principle Ð''primum non nocere' translated into Ð''First, Do No Harm' and is what seems to be one of the first traces of utility. However Chinese philosopher Mozi was one of the first people to have an ethical system based on utilitarianism when founded his school in Mohism.

Some 1800 years later Jeremy Bentham proposed the principle of utilitarianism in Europe believing that pleasure and pain were the two Ð''absolutes' of the world in the world almost like Ð''black and white' and he showed us this with this statement Ð''nature has put man under the governance of two sovereign masters: pleasure and pain'. From here Bentham developed the Ð''Greatest Happiness Principle' (GHP) which is creating Ð''the greatest happiness for the greatest number'.

This was furthered by John Stuart Mill who reckoned that the intellectual, cultural and spiritual pleasures connecting more to emotion and feelings were of more value and meaning than actual physical pleasure.

Within Utilitarianism there are many types and forms and variations, these include; Act, Rule, Preference, Negative and motive utilitarianism. However, the two Ð''main' forms of utilitarianism are Act and Rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism revolves around the theory that the act which would yield the most happiness should be carried out. However, rule utilitarianism has a slight variation on this, rule utilitarianism revolves around the theory that the best act is to follow a rule that in the long term would create the most happiness.

A good example for this conflict is maybe traffic lights or even a being in a clue. If there was a cue in a shop and you're quickly getting some beer for you're party of which your girlfriend and some other friends are waiting for you outside, do you push in front of the small 13 year old kid in front of you with a big trolley of shopping and therefore leave the shop quicker and get to the party?, knowing that the 13 year old boy wont say a thing because you 7ft, or do you follow a moral rule of not pushing in? An Act utilitarian would push in front of the boy seeing as his happy does not match up to yours, and you're travelling party not to mention that the people at the party are waiting for beer. However, a Rule utilitarian would not push in front of a boy, knowing that there is a moral rule there saying that we should wait our turn so to speak. So act utilitarianism would put the greatest happiness for the greatest number first no matter what the circumstance. Whereas Rule utilitarians would follow these rules knowing that in the long run there would be a greater happiness as you wouldn't have people pushing in front of you all of the time.

Another form of utilitarianism is preference utilitarianism; this is where the greatest happiness is maximised by fulfilling peoples preferences. Of course this form of utilitarianism seems to be the form which will maximise happiness because in theory there shouldn't be a minority. You could say that this is what the biggest advantage of utilitarianism would be, the fact that everyone would get what they want and therefore be happy, like maybe someone having a good reputation, with preference utilitarianism if my friend wanted to have a good reputation but his girlfriends was saying how much of a bad boyfriend he was, I wouldn't have to tell him because he wants a good reputation so if by not telling him, he believes he has one then I shouldn't have to tell him. This would make him happier and it will probably make the girlfriend happier too as she does not have to then have him confront her over what she has said.

However, the big disadvantage of this example in particular is that what he wants wouldn't be true, not telling him would follow a Ð''what you don't know won't hurt you' type of rule and he wouldn't actually have a good reputation even though he believed he did. Another example of this could be a young footballer, whose got a promising career ahead of him except that when he has trails with maximus untied, the treble winning global dominating football team, the scouts and coaches don't think he is a good enough standard, however they sign him anyway because they don't want the surrounding local clubs to get hold of him. Now the boy of course thinks that he has been signed by maximus utd. Because he has talent and will be destined for greatness, yet the coaches don't tell him the real reason why they signed him, the boy wants to play for the team because he's thinks he's good enough. So therefore what he doesn't know won't hurt him.

However in both examples you would assume that the two boys wouldn't want to be lied to so therefore there's a clash. Therefore this is a disadvantage of preference utilitarianism. Though the biggest disadvantage is the fact that whether it is actually possible to make everyone happy, if a kid wants the latest console for Christmas but his family cannot

afford it, yet the mum wants to maximise happiness so she goes into debt getting it for him, therefore that makes her unhappy with the stress of being in debt. Also if everyone got want they wanted, or at least tried to, it would certainly send society into a free for all wouldn't it? I want to get home in time

...