Jeremy Bentham Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Jeremy Bentham - Essay Example Utilitarianism is probably the greatest work by Jeremy Bentham. The ethical foundations he laid down are still widely accepted by the general public. Bentham based his moral philosophy of Utilitarianism in public good and happiness. He argued that people should act in a way so as to maximize public good for the maximum number of people (Bentham, 3). The moral philosophy of Bentham became famous because it was representative of human nature. Before Bentham moral philosophy was based on complex principles and there was a divide between moral philosophies and the general public. Bentham brought moral philosophy and ethics within the grasp of the general public. The concept of maximum good for the maximum people is quite easy to understand and this is one reason why people still discuss and apply this theory when facing ethical dilemmas. Jeremy Bentham got his bachelors and masters degree from The Queen’s College, Oxford. He was from an educated family therefore he got all the necessary training and education from his family. Bentham presented many social reforms related to prison system, women, and economic freedom. He was an ardent proponent of women’s right and thought that women should get equal right to men. The aim of Bentham’s philosophy was to maximize the public benefit and minimize the pain of the people. All of the social reforms and changes in the legislature suggested by Bentham were based on the principle of maximum utility of the society. He thought that laws should be aimed to benefit the public in general so that overall happiness of the society can be increased. Pleasure and pain according to Bentham were the main motivators of human action therefore his ethics is based upon increasing pleasure and reducing pain of the maximum number of people in the society. Contribution of Jeremy Bentham to the subject of ethics is great because his theory of utilitarianism is stills studied in every ethics related course all over the globe.

Moral Obligations To The Poor In The Article by Peter Singer Assignment

Moral Obligations To The Poor In The Article by Peter Singer - Assignment Example According to him, it is essential that human beings bring about a change in their moral conceptual scheme, i.e. the way they perceive moral issues and the commonly accepted way of life. As he remarks, it is commonly accepted at the international level that suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are not good. In this background, Singer’s argument has great relevance in wider perspective, i.e. we have moral liability to prevent something bad from happening if it is in our power to do so. Therefore, it is indubitable that Singer’s article â€Å"Famine, Affluence, and Morality† raises some of the essential questions of social and moral concerns, and he provides a very convincing argument about this issue. In the background of the Bengal emergency, Singer proposes his argument that â€Å"if it is in our power to prevent something very bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything morally significant, we ought, morally, to do itâ⠂¬  (Singer, 1972). He also provides convincing evidences and illustrations to support his argument, thereby making the readers agree with his proposition. Significantly, his principle takes no account of proximity or distance; not the distinction based on how many people can offer the assistance. Through his arguments, Singer upsets the traditional moral categories, because, in this case, the traditional distinction between duty and charity cannot be drawn. Thus, he argues for a moral concept of charity which is higher than that of the traditional acts of charity and disagrees with the present way of drawing the distinction between duty and charity, which makes it an act of charity for a man living at the level of affluence to give money to save someone else from starvation. (Singer, 1972). In the course of his article, Singer explains three counter-arguments to his position addressed in the article and offers his responses to those counter-arguments. The first objection to his po sition is that it is too drastic a revision of our moral scheme and they argue that people normally reserve their moral condemnation for those who violate moral norms of society, rather than those who indulge in luxury instead of giving to famine relief. In response to this counter-argument, Singer maintains that the imperatives of duty merely try to prohibit intolerable behavior in the society rather than to cause charity. Therefore, the present division between acts of duty and acts of charity is a valid argument. The second objection to Singer’s arguments arises from â€Å"some forms of utilitarian theory that we all ought, morally, to be working full time to increase the balance of happiness over misery† (Singer, 1972). Singer counters these arguemnts with evidences from writings of Thomas Aquinas and others, and provides practical as well as philosophical arguments. According to the third counter-argument, overseas aid should be a government responsibility. They a lso argue that until there is effective population control, relieving famine merely postpones starvation. However, Singer also makes his arguments to counter these views and suggests that methods of preventing famine should be adopted by us while the other organizations work specifically for population control. In support of his arguments, Singer introduces the concept of marginal utility in order to respond to the question of just how much we all ought to be giving away. Marginal utility is the â€Å"level at which, by giving more, I would cause as much suffering to myself or my