'Human and Utilitarianism Essay\r'

'Let me experience by defining utilitarianism: utilitarianism is the belief of doing what is objurgate for the great number of people. It is a hypothesis used to determine the usefulness of the happiest end and how it exit affect every one else. Now, this sounds like a amazing system, what would be better than make yourself and others contented? I found myself at first consenting with this theory up until I re every last(predicate)y looked into it. At first I found myself thinking that non every intimacy is intimately beingness happy; somewhat whitethorn bemuse to suffer for the triumph of others.\r\nFor example, on that rouse were two boats one contains trine criminals on death wrangling being transported to prison and the other boat contains ten happy, pleasing families simply enjoying a vacation. Both ships subscribe miscarrys that will go off in a matter of seconds, blowing up both(prenominal) ships and cleanup everyone. However, on that point is a solu tion. I for some odd reason ca-ca a device that sets off a break on ONE post and deactivates the other. Now the morally rectify thing to do would be what? What is moral and right? Taking lives? Or saving them? I do not think in ‘playing matinee idol’ or winning lives.\r\nI would simply ignore the Utilitarianism mien of thinking and straits away. I would allow nature take its course. If God has place this to happen, then it is save in mindt to happen. Who am I to walk in and ‘play God’ ? I piss to say I agree with Hospers when he says â€Å"A hundred workforce might gain great merri workforcet from beating up or killing skillful one Insignifi tusht world being; only other men’s lives argon not theirs to slash of. ” (Hospers) A Utilitarian would approach this short permitter by asking himself/herself, what will down happiness? What will do near for greater numbers of people?\r\n wherefore should the prisoners get to live ? there ar only three prisoners, and have a bun in the oven do nothing good but pass water harm to society. What have these families make? The Utilitarian will start to analyze apiece detail of the property. They first adopt that there atomic number 18 only three prisoners as opposed to ten large families. Hence, there are less people on the prisoners boat. Then he/she will see that the prisoners have already been sentenced to death, all being on death row. However, the main point will be that these are three bad men. Doing bad things, and causing pang and sorrow\r\nto others. why should ten happy families be punished for their wrong doings? The Utilitarian would settle for simply deactivating the miscarry on the prisoners boat. Believing that killing them will bring greater good and happiness to all. My argument to this is a human feel is a human life; what if one of those men are actually gratuitous and were convicted for a crime he didn’t commit? What if t he other criminal was to be renounced in the morning and go house to a family of eight children and a agreeable wife? Truth is we don’t hump.\r\nUtilitarianism fails to acknowledge that a life is a life- we are not suppose to be playing God. We don’t specify who lives and who dies, even if it is for the greater good. We should undecomposed let nature run its course. Utilitarianism is a theory of always choosing pleasure over throe for the greater good of all. I believe that I have kept a closed mind towards Utilitarianism. The prisoners are already on death row, which means they are going to die for the evil they have set loose on our world. Why should I sacrifice the lives of exculpatory families, for a couple of men that have caused sorrowfulness to all?\r\nI want to seize happiness, as does everyone else in the world. I mean does the world function over what the greater good for all is? Is that why we have soldiers in Iraq sacrificing their lives for the g reater good of the States? Maybe I have just overlooked all the positive outcomes of Utilitarianism. I grow myself agreeing with a lot of what it has to say. I want happiness, I want innocent lives to be saved, and I want to hit for the greater good of all. I find it interesting how easy it is to fall into the consolation of Utilitarianism.\r\nIt goes along with my morals and values and to that extent I still feel a sort of guilt. If I were to deactivate the bomb on the ship with the families and let the prisoners die, I would still be taking a human life. In my religion (Catholicism), a life is a life. We must exonerate sinners and those who have sinned against us. But if these prisoners are on death row…were they already destined to die? Would that already be in God’s plan? Was it God who sacrificed his only son for all of us sinners? I feel in a way that makes God himself a ally of utilitarianism.\r\nHe set the example of religious offering his only son for ou r sins, to open the gate of heaven for everyone. Yet one of the decade Commandments is â€Å"Thou shall not kill. ” Is that not hypocritical? As I keep analyzing this built in bed I realize that God is God. He decides who lives and who dies, not us. I feel that it’s hard to stick to my morals when earshot the theory of Utilitarianism. Allowing someone to die at my hand for the greater good, for happiness of others. That just sounds selfish to me, kind of like the holocaust. Did all those innocent Jews endure experimentation and distortion for the greater good of all?\r\nI mean, if it weren’t for these grotesque experiments we wouldn’t know the maximum altitude that crews in damage planes can parachute safely to the background or find the cure/ interposition for hypothermia. The Jews were used as guinea pigs for the greater good of everyone else. Is that not Utilitarianism? So umteen people could have died of hypothermia if that experiment was neer c onducted. But how many innocent lives were broken to reach this conclusion? Is there a limit to how much sacrifice should be made for the greater good? There should be.\r\nThis is where I cannot connect with Utilitarianism, the fact that some sort of evil has to be done to help others. I see untruth in this theory; it wants happiness but wants to rule out evil. People are evil, mean and rude. No one can be happy all the condemnation; no one can bring eternal happiness. This takes me back to my original example, who would I save? The prisoners on death row or the innocent families? The Utilitarian’s seem to have a much interesting argument. Its funny how by penning this paper, my views changed. I look at the situation differently now. I do not feel as biased and buttoned-up as before.\r\nMy ideas have changed to a much liberal understanding sense. Why release these evil me back into the world? We have enough chaos and evil. These are just three men who chose their paths and now have to pay for it. They were sentenced to death for a reason, I will not be held amenable for the innocence of happy families, children, parents, aunts and uncles. They are not in prison because they have not done anything wrong. They simply stepped onto a ship, whose indispensableness I now hold in my hands. I have made my prime(prenominal); I will deactivate the bomb on the families boat and let the prisoners administration death.\r\n'