Act Utilitarianism Essay Example for Free

Act Utilitarianism Essay Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the proper course of action is the one that maximizes overall happiness. It is now generally taken to be a form of consequentialism, although when Anscombe first introduced that term it was to distinguish between old-fashioned Utilitarianism and consequentialism. [1] According to utilitarianism the moral worth of an action is determined only by its resulting outcome although there is debate over how much consideration should be given to actual consequences, foreseen consequences and intended consequences. Two influential contributors to this theory are Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. In A Fragment on Government Bentham says ‘it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong’ and describes this as a fundamental axiom. In An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation he talks of ‘the principle of utility’ but later prefers â€Å"the greatest happiness principle. [2][3] Utilitarianism can be characterized as a quantitative and reductionist approach to ethics. It is a type of naturalism. [4] It can be contrasted with deontological ethics,[5] which does not regard the consequences of an act as a determinant of its moral worth; virtue ethics,[6] which primarily focuses on acts and habits leading to happiness; pragmatic ethics; as well as with ethical egoism and other varieties of consequentialism. [7] Utilitarianism has often been considered the natural ethic of a democracy operating by simple majority without protection of individual rights. [8] Early utilitarianism The importance of happiness as an end for humans has long been recognized. Forms of hedonism were put forward by Aristippus and Epicurus; Aristotle argued that eudaimonia is the highest human good and Augustine wrote that all men agree in desiring the last end, which is happiness. Happiness was also explored in depth by Aquinas[9][10][11][12][13] However, utilitarianism as a distinct ethical position only emerged in the eighteenth century. Although utilitarianism is usually thought to start with Jeremy Bentham there were earlier writers who presented theories that were strikingly similar. In An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals David Hume writes: In all determinations of morality, this circumstance of public utility is ever principally in view; and wherever disputes arise, either in philosophy or common life, concerning the bounds of duty, the question cannot, by any means, be decided with greater certainty, than by ascertaining, on any side, the true interests of mankind. [14] Hume had studied under Francis Hutcheson and it was he who first introduced a key utilitarian phrase. In An Inquiry into the Original of Our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue (1725) Hutcheson writes, In comparing the moral qualitys of actions, in order to regulate our election among various actions proposed, or to find which of them has the greatest moral excellency, we are led by our moral sense of virtue to judge thus; that in equal degrees of happiness, expected to proceed from the action, the virtue is in proportion to the number of persons to whom the happiness shall extend (and here the dignity, or moral importance of persons, may compensate numbers); And in equal numbers, the virtue is as the quantity of the happiness, or natural good; or that the virtue is in a compound ratio of the quantity of good, and number of enjoyers. In the same manner, the moral evil, or vice, is as the degree of misery, and number of sufferers; so that, that action is best, which procures the greatest happiness for the greatest numbers; and that, worst, which, in like manner, occasions misery. [15]. In the first three editions of the book Hutcheson followed this passage with various mathematical algorithms â€Å"to compute the Morality of any Actions†. In this he pre-figured the hedonic calculus of Bentham. It is claimed[16] that the first systematic theory of utilitarian ethics was developed by John Gay. In Concerning the Fundamental Principle of Virtue or Morality (1731) Gay argues that. Utilitarianism â€Å"happiness, private happiness, is the proper or ultimate end of all our actions†¦ each particular action may be said to have its proper and peculiar end†¦(but)†¦. they still tend or ought to tend to something farther; as is evident from hence, viz. that a man may ask and expect a reason why either of them are pursued: now to ask the reason of any action or pursuit, is only to enquire into the end of it: but to expect a reason, i. e. an end, to be assigned for an ultimate end, is absurd. To ask why I pursue happiness, will admit of no other answer than an explanation of the terms. †[17] This pursuit of happiness is given a theological basis: â€Å"Now it is evident from the nature of God, viz.his being infinitely happy in himself from all eternity, and from his goodness manifested in his works, that he could have no other design in creating mankind than their happiness; and therefore he wills their happiness; therefore the means of their happiness: therefore that my behaviour, as far as it may be a means of the happiness of mankind, should be such†¦thus the will of God is the immediate criterion of Virtue, and the happiness of mankind the criterion of the wilt of God; and therefore the happiness of mankind may be said to be the criterion of virtue, but once removed†¦(and)†¦ I am to do whatever lies in my power towards promoting the happiness of mankind. [18] Gay’s theological utilitarianism was developed and popularized by William Paley. It has been claimed that Paley was not a very original thinker and that the philosophical part of his treatise on ethics is â€Å"an assemblage of ideas developed by others and is presented to be learned by students rather than debated by colleagues. †[19] Nevertheless, his book The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy (1785) was a required text at Cambridge[19] and Smith says that Paley’s writings were â€Å"once as well known in American colleges as were the readers and spellers of William McGuffey and Noah Webster in the elementary schools. †[20] Although now largely missing from the philosophical canon, Schneewind writes that utilitarianism first became widely known in England through the work of William Paley. [21] The now forgotten significance of Paley can be judged from the title of Birks 1874 work Modern Utilitarianism or the Systems of Paley, Bentham and Mill Examined and Compared. Apart from restating that happiness as an end is grounded in the nature of God, Paley also discusses the place of rules. He writes, â€Å"†¦actions are to be estimated by their tendency. Whatever is expedient, is right. It is the utility of any moral rule alone, which constitutes the obligation of it. Modern Utilitarianism by T. R. Birks 1874 2 But to all this there seems a plain objection, viz. that many actions are useful, which no man in his senses will allow to be right. There are occasions, in which the hand of the assassin would be very useful†¦ The true answer is this; that these actions, after all, are not useful, and for that reason, and that alone, are not right. To see this point perfectly, it must be observed that the bad consequences of actions are twofold, particular and general. The particular bad consequence of an action, is the mischief which that single action directly and immediately occasions. The general bad consequence is, the violation of some necessary or useful general rule†¦ You cannot permit one action and forbid another, without showing a difference between them. Consequently, the same sort of actions must be generally permitted or generally forbidden. Where, Utilitarianism therefore, the general permission of them would be pernicious, it becomes necessary to lay down and support the rule which generally forbids them. †[22] 3 Classical utilitarianism Jeremy Bentham Benthams book An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation was printed in 1780 but not published until 1789. It is possible that Bentham was spurred on to publish after he saw the success of Paley’s The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy. [23] Benthams book was not an immediate success[24] but his ideas were spread further when Pierre Etienne Louis Dumont translated edited selections from a variety of Benthams manuscripts into French. Traite de legislation civile et penale was published in 1802 and then later retranslated back into English by Hildreth as The Theory of Legislation, although by this time significant portions of Dumont’s work had already been retranslated and incorporated into Sir John Bowrings edition of Benthams works, which was issued in parts between 1838 and 1843. Benthams work opens with a statement of the principle of utility, â€Å"Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do†¦ By the principle of utility is meant that principle which approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever according to the tendency it appears to have to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question: or, what is the same thing in other words to promote or to oppose that happiness. I say of every action whatsoever, and therefore not only of every action of a private individual, but of every measure of government. †[25] In Chapter IV Bentham introduces a method of calculating the value of pleasures and pains, which has come to be known as the hedonic calculus. Bentham says that the value of a pleasure or pain, considered by itself, can be measured according to its intensity, duration, certainty/uncertainty and propinquity/remoteness. In addition, it is necessary to consider â€Å"the tendency of any act by which it is produced† and, therefore, to take account of the act’s fecundity, or the chance it has of being followed by sensations of the same kind and its purity, or the chance it has of not being followed by sensations of the opposite kind. Finally, it is necessary to consider the extent, or the number of people affected by the action. Perhaps aware that Hutcheson eventually removed his algorithms for calculating the greatest happiness because they â€Å"appear’d useless, and were disagreeable to some readers†[26] Bentham contends that there is nothing novel or unwarranted about his method for â€Å"in all this there is nothing but what the practice of mankind, wheresoever they have a clear view of their own interest, is perfectly conformable to. † Rosen warns that descriptions of utilitarianism can bear â€Å"little resemblance historically to utilitarians like Bentham and J. S. Mill† and can be more â€Å"a crude version of act utilitarianism conceived in the twentieth century as a straw man to be attacked and rejected. †[27] It is a mistake to think that Bentham is not concerned with rules. His seminal work is concerned with the principles of legislation and the hedonic calculus is introduced with the words â€Å"Pleasures then, and the avoidance of pains, are the ends that the legislator has in view. † In Chapter VII Bentham says, â€Å"The business of government is to promote the happiness of the society, by punishing and rewarding†¦ In proportion as an act tends to disturb that happiness, in proportion as the tendency of it is pernicious, will be the demand it creates for punishment. † The question then arises as to when, if at all, it might legitimate to break the law. This is considered in The Theory of Legislation where Bentham distinguishes between evils of the first and second orders. Those of the first order are the more immediate consequences; those of the second are when the consequences spread through the community causing ‘alarm’ and ‘danger’. Utilitarianism â€Å"It is true there are cases in which, if we confine ourselves to the effects of the first order, the good will have an incontestable preponderance over the evil. Were the offence considered only under this point of view, it would not be easy to assign any good reasons to justify the rigour of the laws. Every thing depends upon the evil of the second order; it is this which gives to such actions the character of crime, and which makes punishment necessary. Let us take, for example, the physical desire of satisfying hunger. Let a beggar, pressed by hunger, steal from a rich mans house a loaf, which perhaps saves him from starving, can it be possible to compare the good which the thief acquires for himself, with the evil which the rich man suffers? †¦ It is not on account of the evil of the first order that it is necessary to erect these actions into offences, but on account of the evil of the second order. †[28] 4 John Stuart Mill Mill was brought up as a Benthamite with the explicit intention that would carry on the cause of utilitarianism. [29] Mills book Utilitarianism first appeared as a series of three articles published in Frasers Magazine in 1861 and was reprinted as a single book in 1863. Higher and lower pleasures Mill rejects a purely quantitative measurement of utility and says, â€Å"It is quite compatible with the principle of utility to recognise the fact, that some kinds of pleasure are more desirable and more valuable than others. It would be absurd that while, in estimating all other things, quality is considered as well as quantity, the estimation of pleasures should be supposed to depend on quantity alone. †[30] Mill notes that, contrary to what its critics might say, there is â€Å"no known Epicurean theory of life which does not assign to the pleasures of the intellect†¦ a much higher value as pleasures than to those of mere sensation. † However, he accepts that this is usually because the intellectual pleasures are thought to have circumstantial advantages, i. e. â€Å"greater permanency, safety, uncostliness, c. † Instead, Mill will argue that some pleasures are intrinsically better than others. The accusation that hedonism is â€Å"doctrine worthy only of swine† has a long history. In Nicomachean Ethics (Book 1 Chapter 5) Aristotle says that identifying the good with pleasure is to prefer a life suitable for beasts. The theological utilitarians had the option of grounding their pursuit of happiness in the will of God; the hedonistic utilitarians needed a different defense. Mill’s approach is to argue that the pleasures of the intellect are intrinsically superior to physical pleasures. Few human creatures would consent to be changed into any of the lower animals, for a promise of the fullest allowance of a beasts pleasures; no intelligent human being would consent to be a fool, no instructed person would be an ignoramus, no person of feeling and conscience would be selfish and base, even though they should be persuaded that the fool, the dunce, or the rascal is better satisfied with his lot than they are with theirs†¦ A being of higher faculties requires more to make him happy, is capable probably of more acute suffering, and is certainly accessible to it at more points, than one of an inferior type; but in spite of these liabilities, he can never really wish to sink into what he feels to be a lower grade of existence†¦ It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question†¦ [31] Mill argues that if people who are â€Å"competently acquainted† with two pleasures show a decided preference for one even if it be accompanied by more discontent and â€Å"would not resign it for any quantity of the other† then it is legitimate to regard that pleasure as being superior in quality. Mill recognises that these ‘competent judges’ will not always agree, in which case the judgment of the majority is to be accepted as final. Mill also acknowledges that â€Å"many who are capable of the higher pleasures, occasionally, under the influence of temptation, postpone them to the Utilitarianism lower. But this is quite compatible with a full appreciation of the intrinsic superiority of the higher. † Mill says that this appeal to those who have experienced the relevant pleasures is no different to what must happen when assessing the quantity of pleasure for there is no other way of measuring â€Å"the acutest of two pains, or the intensest of two pleasurable sensations. † Mills proof of the principle of utility In Chapter Four of Utilitarianism Mill considers what proof can be given for the Principle of Utility. He says’ â€Å" The only proof capable of being given that an object is visible, is that people actually see it. The only proof that a sound is audible, is that people hear it In like manner, I apprehend, the sole evidence it is possible to produce that anything is desirable, is that people do actually desire it†¦ No reason can be given why the general happiness is desirable, except that each person, so far as he believes it to be attainable, desires his own happiness†¦ we have not only all the proof which the case admits of, but all which it is possible to require, that happiness is a good: that each persons happiness is a good to that person, and the general happiness, therefore, a good to the aggregate of all persons. †[32] It is usual[33] to say that Mill is committing a number of fallacies. He is accused of committing the naturalistic fallacy, because he is trying to deduce what people ought to do from what they do in fact do; the fallacy of equivocation, because he moves from the fact that something is desirable(1), i. e. is capable of being desired, to the claim that it is desirable(2), i. e.that it ought to be desired; and the fallacy of composition, because the fact that people desire their own happiness does not imply that the aggregate of all persons will desire the general happiness. Hall[34] and Popkin[35] defend Mill against this accusation pointing out that he begins Chapter Four by asserting that â€Å"that questions of ultimate ends do not admit of proof, in the ordinary acceptation of the term† and that this is â€Å"common to all first principles. † According to Hall and Popkin, therefore, Mill does not attempt to â€Å"establish that what people do desire is desirable but merely attempts to make the principles acceptable. †[33] The type of â€Å"proof† Mill is offering consists only of some considerations which, Mill thought, might induce an honest and reasonable man to accept utilitarianism. [33] Having claimed that people do, in fact, desire happiness Mill now has to show that it is the only thing they desire. Mill anticipates the objection that people desire other things such as virtue. He argues that whilst people might start desiring virtue as a means to happiness, eventually, it becomes part of someone’s happiness and is then desired as an end in itself. The principle of utility does not mean that any given pleasure, as music, for instance, or any given exemption from pain, as for example health, are to be looked upon as means to a collective something termed happiness, and to be desired on that account. They are desired and desirable in and for themselves; besides being means, they are a part of the end. Virtue, according to the utilitarian doctrine, is not naturally and originally part of the end, but it is capable of becoming so; and in those who love it disinterestedly it has become so, and is desired and cherished, not as a means to happiness, but as a part of their happiness. [36] 5 Utilitarianism 6 Twentieth century developments Ideal Utilitarianism The description Ideal Utilitarianism was first used by Hastings Rashdall in The Theory of Good and Evil (1907) but is more often associated with G. E. Moore. In Ethics (1912) Moore rejected a purely hedonistic utilitarianism and argued that there is a range of values that might be maximized. Moore’s strategy was to show that it is intuitively implausible that pleasure is the sole measure of what is good. He says that such an assumption, â€Å" involves our saying, for instance, that a world in which absolutely nothing except pleasure existed—no knowledge, no love, no enjoyment of beauty, no moral qualities—must yet be intrinsically better—better worth creating—provided only the total quantity of pleasure in it were the least bit greater, than one in which all these things existed as well as pleasure. † â€Å"It involves our saying that, even if the total quantity of pleasure in each was exactly equal, yet the fact that all the beings in the one possessed in addition knowledge of many different kinds and a full appreciation of all that was beautiful or worthy of love in their world, whereas none of the beings in the other possessed any of these things, would give us no reason whatever for preferring the former to the latter. †[37] Moore admits that it is impossible to prove the case either way but believed that it was intuitively obvious that even if the amount of pleasure stayed the same a world that contained such things as beauty and love would be a better world. He adds that if anybody took the contrary view then â€Å"I think it is self-evident that he would be wrong. †[37] Act and rule utilitarianism In the mid-twentieth century a number of philosophers focused on the place of rules in utilitarian thinking. [38] It was already accepted that it is necessary to use rules to help you choose the right action because the problems of calculating the consequences on each and every occasion would almost certainly result in you frequently choosing something less than the best course of action. Paley had justified the use of rules and Mill says, â€Å"It is truly a whimsical supposition that, if mankind were agreed in considering utility to be the test of morality, they would remain without any agreement as to what is useful, and would take no measures for having their notions on the subject taught to the young, and enforced by law and opinion†¦ to consider the rules of morality as improvable, is one thing; to pass over the intermediate generalisations entirely, and endeavour to test each individual action directly by the first principle, is another†¦ The proposition that happiness is the end and aim of morality, does not mean that no road ought to be laid down to that goal†¦ Nobody argues that the art of navigation is not founded on astronomy, because sailors cannot wait to calculate the Nautical Almanack. Being rational creatures, they go to sea with it ready calculated; and all rational creatures go out upon the sea of life with their minds made up on the common questions of right and wrong. †[39] However, rule utilitarianism proposes a more central role for rules that was thought to rescue the theory from some of its more devastating criticisms, particularly problems to do with justice and promise keeping. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s articles were published both for and against the new form of utilitarianism and through this debate the theory we now call rule utilitarianism was created. In an introduction to an anthology of these articles the editor was able to say, â€Å"The development of this theory was a dialectical process of formulation, criticism, reply and reformulation; the record of this process well illustrates the co-operative development of a philosophical theory. †[40] Smart[41] and McCloskey[42] initially used the terms extreme and restricted utilitarianism but eventually everyone settled on the terms act and rule utilitarianism. The essential difference is in what determines whether or not an action is the right action. Act utilitarianism maintains that an action is right if it maximises utility; rule utilitarianism maintains that an action is right if it Utilitarianism conforms to a rule that maximises utility. In 1953 Urmson published an influential article[43] arguing that Mill justified rules on utilitarian principles. From then on articles have debated this interpretation of Mill. In all probability it was not a distinction that Mill was particularly trying to make and so the evidence in his writing is inevitably mixed. In 1977 a collection of Mill’s writing was published which included a letter in which he said: â€Å"I agree with you that the right way of testing actions by their consequences, is to test them by the natural consequences of the particular action, and not by those which would follow if everyone did the same. But, for the most part, the consideration of what would happen if everyone did the same, is the only means we have of discovering the tendency of the act in the particular case. †[44] This seems to tip the balance in favour of saying that Mill is best classified as an act utilitarian. Some school level textbooks and at least one UK examination board[45] make a further distinction between strong and weak rule utilitarianism. However, it is not clear that this distinction is made in the academic literature. It has been argued that rule utilitarianism collapses into act utilitarianism, because for any given rule, in the case where breaking the rule produces more utility, the rule can be refined by the addition of a sub-rule that handles cases like the exception. [46] This process holds for all cases of exceptions, and so the ‘rules’ have as many ‘sub-rules’ as there are exceptional cases, which, in the end, makes an agent seek out whatever outcome produces the maximum utility. [47] 7 Two-level Utilitarianism In Principles (1973)[48] R. M. Hare accepts that rule utilitarianism collapses into act utilitarianism but claims that this is a result of allowing the rules to be as specific and un-general as we please. He argues that one of the main reasons for introducing rule utilitarianism was to do justice to the general rules that people need for moral education and character development and he proposes that â€Å"a difference between act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism can be introduced by limiting the specificity of the rules, i. e. , by increasing their generality. †[49] This distinction between a ‘specific rule utilitarianism’ (which collapses into act utilitarianism) and ‘general rule utilitarianism’ forms the basis of Hare’s two-level utilitarianism. When we are ‘playing God or the ideal observer’ we use the specific form and we will need to do this when we are deciding what general principles to teach and follow. When we are ‘inculcating’ or in situations where the biases of our human nature are likely to prevent us doing the calculations properly, then we should use the more general rule utilitarianism. Hare argues that in practice, most of the time, we should be following the general principles: â€Å"One ought to abide by the general principles whose general inculcation is for the best; harm is more likely to come, in actual moral situations, from questioning these rules than from sticking to them, unless the situations are very extra-ordinary; the results of sophisticated felicific calculations are not likely, human nature and human ignorance being what they are, to lead to the greatest utility. †[50] In Moral Thinking (1981) Hare illustrated the two extremes. The archangel is the hypothetical person who has perfect knowledge of the situation and no personal biases or weaknesses and always uses critical moral thinking to decide the right thing to do; the ‘prole’ is the hypothetical person who is completely incapable of critical thinking and uses nothing but intuitive moral thinking and, of necessity, has to follow the general moral rules they have been taught or learned through imitation. [51] It is not that some people are archangels and others proles but rather â€Å"we all share the characteristics of both to limited and varying degrees and at different times. †[51] Hare does not specify when we should think more like an archangel and more like a prole as this will, in any case, vary from person to person. However, the critical moral thinking underpins and informs the more intuitive moral thinking. It is responsible for formulating and, if necessary, reformulating the general moral rules. We also switch to critical thinking when trying to deal with unusual situations or in cases where the intuitive moral rules give Utilitarianism conflicting advice. 8 Preference utilitarianism Preference utilitarianism was first put forward in 1977 by John Harsanyi in Morality and the theory of rational behaviour[52] but it is more commonly associated with R. M. Hare,[51] Peter Singer[53] and Richard Brandt. [54] Harsanyi claimed that his theory is indebted to Adam Smith, who equated the moral point of view with that of an impartial but sympathetic observer; to Kant who insisted on the criterion of universality and which may also be described as a criterion of reciprocity; to the classical utilitarians who made maximising social utility the basic criterion of morality; and to ‘the modern theory of rational behaviour under risk and uncertainty, usually described as Bayesian decision theory’. [55] Harsanyi rejects hedonistic utilitarianism as being dependent on an outdated psychology saying that it is far from obvious that everything we do is motivated by a desire to maximise pleasure and minimise pain. He also rejects ideal utilitarianism because â€Å"it is certainly not true as an empirical observation that people’s only purpose in life is to have ‘mental states of intrinsic worth’. †[56] According to Harsanyi, â€Å"preference utilitarianism is the only form of utilitarianism consistent with the important philosophical principle of preference autonomy. By this I mean the principle that, in deciding what is good and what is bad for a given individual, the ultimate criterion can only be his own wants and his own preferences. †[57] Harsanyi adds two caveats. People sometimes have irrational preferences. To deal with this Harsanyi distinguishes between ‘manifest’ preferences and ‘true’ preferences. The former are those â€Å"manifested by his observed behaviour, including preferences possibly based on erroneous factual beliefs, or on careless logical analysis, or on strong emotions that at the moment greatly hinder rational choice† whereas the latter are â€Å"the preferences he would have if he had all the relevant factual information, always reasoned with the greatest possible care, and were in a state of mind most conducive to rational choice. †[57] It is the latter that preference utilitarianism tries to satisfy. The second caveat is that antisocial preferences such as sadism, envy and resentment have to be excluded. Harsanyi achieves this by claiming that such preferences partially exclude those people from the moral community. â€Å"Utilitarian ethics makes all of us members of the same moral community. A person displaying ill will toward others does remain a member of this community, but not with his whole personality. That part of his personality that harbours these hostile antisocial feelings must be excluded from membership, and has no claim for a hearing when it comes to defining our concept of social utility. †[58] More varieties of utilitarianism Negative utilitarianism In The Open Society and its Enemies (1945), Karl Popper argued that the principle maximize pleasure should be replaced by minimize pain. He thought â€Å"it is not only impossible but very dangerous to attempt to maximize the pleasure or the happiness of the people, since such an attempt must lead to totalitarianism. †[59] He claimed that, â€Å"there is, from the ethical point of view, no symmetry between suffering and happiness, or between pain and pleasure†¦ In my opinion human suffering makes a direct moral appeal, namely, the appeal for help, while there is no similar call to increase the happiness of a man who is doing well anyway. A further criticism of the Utilitarian formula ‘Maximize pleasure’ is that it assumes a continuous pleasure-pain scale which allows us to treat degrees of pain as negative degrees of pleasure. But, from the moral point of view, pain cannot be outweighed by pleasure, and especially not one man’s pain by another man’s pleasure. Instead of the greatest happiness for the greatest number, one should demand, more modestly, the least amount of avoidable suffering for all †[60] Utilitarianism The actual term Negative Utilitarianism was introduced by R. N. Smart as the title to his 1958 reply to Popper[61] in which he argued that the principle would entail seeking the quickest and least painful method of killing the entirety of humanity. â€Å"Suppose that a ruler controls a weapon capable of instantly and painlessly destroying the human race. Now it is empirically certain that there would be some suffering before all those alive on any proposed destruction day were to die in the natural course of events. Consequently the use of the weapon is bound to diminish suffering, and would be the rulers duty on NU grounds. †[62] Negative utilitarianism would seem to call.

Organizations for Elderly Care

Organizations for Elderly Care There are numerous milestones that we experience as we mature from childhood to old age. Each milestone plays a significant role in the growth and development of every individual. In these life events our family, friends and significant others are there to witness these and even share with the joys and the disappointments as well. Getting old is inevitable. It is not something we can prevent from happening or even put a halt on it. How we age depends on how we live our lives. Some may dread even the idea of getting old while others are looking forward to it. According to New Zealand Statistic (2010), the population of citizens ageing 65 years and above comprises 11 per cent of the entire population as of 1991 and is forecasted to reach 21 per cent the year 2031. New Zealand is one the countries with an ageing population and so with this information at hand, the government and private sectors has established a number of services in order to aid the ageing population as they face the physical changes of aging Organizations: Age Concern is a non-profit organization committed to ageing New Zealanders. It provides free and confidential services addressing to issues on elder abuse and neglect all throughout New Zealand. The elderly as well their care givers are given support by a team of professional staff who also takes the role of an advocate so that the senior citizens will be able to have a happy, healthy and safe lifestyle. Psychological, physical, financial, neglect, sexual and institutional abuse of the elderly will also be dealt. Service providers are equipped with the skills and knowledge to recognize signs of elder abuse and neglect and act on it. The ageing citizens are treated with utmost respect thus promoting dignity. The organization gives the adequate attention to the needs of the senior citizens by acknowledging its existence and providing the necessary help rather than ignoring it. Grey power is an organization which stands as an advocate for the rights and welfare of New Zealand citizens in the 50 plus age group. It aims for the ageing residents of the country to enjoy and experience quality health care all throughout the country. It also represents the voice of the elderly so that their needs are given attention and be heard by the government as well as acquiring and having the services necessary in the maintenance of their health, as well as the promotion of their security and dignity. Deaf Aotearoa New Zealand is a non-profit organization that caters its services to people with hearing disabilities of any gender and age. It promotes awareness of the rights of deaf people and it access and advancement to New Zealand’s sign language. It works with ageing citizens with hearing disabilities and their significant others to make them understand the importance and the need for the deaf citizens to take part in the society in order to continue living a close to normal if not normal life. Information is also disseminated to the public in order to break down misconceptions, worries and barriers pertaining to having a hearing disability. Alzheimer’s New Zealand is a not for profit organization will members throughout the country in order for people to have access to information, support and services to ageing people with Alzheimer’s disease extending it to their significant others, partners, relatives and friends in order for them to slowly cope up with the demands of caring for someone with the degenerative disease. Information is also available to the public and the person with the disease to aid them in understanding, diagnosing and assessing the disease as well as the management of financial demands of taking care of someone with dementia. HealthEd is free website provided and updated by the Ministry of Health and the Health Promotion Agency open to all New Zealanders. It provides information pertaining to health in order to promote, enhance and safeguard the health of the citizens. The website offers free online information to the ageing citizens in order for them to make the right decisions in living a healthy lifestyle and the appropriate nutrition in order for them to maintain good health. Resources are also available in the website about the degenerative diseases that one may be have or a family member may experience as they age as well as health problems that comes with age and how to cope up these arising health issues and its effects to the rest of the family. Types of Service Organizations: Hospice care is a concept of care for terminally ill ageing people or individuals allowing them to live the remaining days of their life with dignity. It does not focus on curing the disease but rather on making the elderly or resident live a comfortable way of life as possible. Its approach to care is palliative and not curative so to say. Its services include pain management, providing the needed physical, psychosocial, emotional and spiritual assistance of the elderly as well as their significant others in order for coping to take place. The manner of care rendered is not dependent on the agency but it is designed to the personal desire of the resident and the family. Residential Care is a type of service rendered to only a small group, usually a group lesser than 10 residents. Residents are housed in one residence with a home-like setting. Residents are offered lodging and meals are freshly prepared daily. In most cases, residents making use of these kind of service are those seniors who are still capable of doing things on their own at a certain level of independence but nevertheless nursing aids are present to assist them with activities of daily living like bathing, eating and grooming should the residents need it. This is a non-medical custodial care setting and the atmosphere of the homes is kept as personal as possible giving the residents a sense of being in their own homes. Apart from the assistance with the performance of activities of daily living the residents receive, the facility also provide them with custodial care like laundry services, housekeeping and transportation arrangement should the residents need to go to any scheduled ap pointments. In cases when residents have medications, a qualified staff will be there to remind them to continue with medication adherence, it not take part in its administration. Putting into consideration the ratio of care giver to residents, the elderly will surely be offered a lot of one-on-one tender loving care. Nursing home also known as skilled nursing facility, convalescent home, and rest home offers a standard of care to the elderly with medical needs outside of a hospital but in a residential setting. Custodial care is offered like assistance in getting out and in of bed, feeding, grooming and other activities of daily living. Laundry services are also available and meals are also prepared fresh daily. There are scheduled activities that the residents can participate in. What set them apart from the residential care facility is its capacity to render a high level of medical care. A nursing home has a licensed physician supervising the health care of the residents and skilled nursing care is available at all times, as well as nursing aides are available to assist and render care to the residents. In here, residents may have their own room or it may be a shared set up. Domiciliary Care is care provided in your own home. A care provider comes to regularly to a senior citizens home and help the resident with whatever assistance he or she needs be it with bathing, toileting, grooming, meal preparation, housekeeping and even laundry. The number of working hours for care provider depends on the resident requirements in some cases the care provider may even stay in or live with the resident. In this kind of care set up, the senior resident will experience one on one care with a health care provider in the comforts of his or her own home. Social Care Workers provide a varied range of services depending on the needs of the client and at times the financial capability of the client. When senior citizens are assessed to be experiencing geriatric conditions such as dementia, visual and hearing impairments and mobility restrictions but what to still live a life as normal as possible they often call the services of the social care providers. Social care workers come to the client’s home to assist them with bathing, toileting, and grooming. They can also be available to prepare fresh meals for the clients. The work hours rendered by the social care worker depends on how much help is needed by the client, giving the client as much independence as possible so as to maintain a sense of self pride and dignity. Social care workers also schedule interesting activities for the client to enjoy. Emotional support is also given as the adult go through the changes that come with age and advices are provided so that they may be a ble to cope up with these changes that may be caused by illnesses, age related problems and disabilities. The Social care worker also has the duty to see to it that the client regularly takes his/her medications and accompanies the client to scheduled appointments like doctor’s appointment or even hairdressers appointment and other personal appointments. Physiotherapy services. As a person ages, there are different changes that could happen regarding his health and mobility as well. Bones tend to get dense and a person may feel certain restrictions to mobility. These may be pathological in nature or due to trauma or injury. It is the role of the physiotherapist to help the elderly to fully use the functions of the body system to improve mobility and independence and keep the body systems to it maximum capacity. These services can also help in the prevention of the development of other problems that may arise later in life. In cases when improvement and maintenance of the body’s functional mobility is not achievable, the physiotherapist can still help to keep the elder pain free and comfortable as possible. Stigma, according to the Merriam Webster Dictionary, is a set of negative and often unfair beliefs that a society or a group of people have about something. And as an individual approaches old age, there are a couple of major stigmas that are evident in the society and should be addressed to. Issue: Social Isolation of the Individual and their Family There are many factors that could contribute to a elderly’s feeling of loneliness and social isolation. The loss of a family member or a spouse, experiencing a degenerative disease, living alone, poor health and retirement are some of those reasons. Recommendation: There are certain factors that could contribute to an elderly’s feeling of loneliness and isolation and some of these are beyond our control. The loss of a spouse or a significant other is one that is inevitable for death is the end cycle of life but we, the care providers can do something to lessen the feeling of loneliness that comes a loss of a love one and thus helping the elderly cope up with the loss. In Kindly Residential Care Home, there should be a scheduled group activities for the clients, be it a small or a big group. By this, we are paving a chance for each resident to be socially active and be with other elderly who are also experiencing the same thing. Sharing your thoughts and feelings about something with someone who can sympathize can someone give the elderly a feeling that he or she is not alone. It would also be a good idea for let the residents give their suggestions and ideas on the kind of activities that would be done in the rest home, in this way they will feel a sense of belongingness knowing that they can take part in structuring the activities that they would be participating on. It would also be beneficial if remaining family members or even friends are encouraged to visit the residents on a regular basis in this way residents will know and feel that their existence is still of value to their family.

The Character of Caliban in Shakespeare’s The Tempest Essays -- Tempes

The Character of Caliban in Shakespeare’s The Tempest Caliban is one of the most interesting of Shakespeare’s characters. For centuries, scholars have puzzled over the meaning and importance of this central character. Who or what is this creature? Is he a man or a beast (Peterson, p.2)? Most of the people who have debated this question take the question itself at face value. Caliban is either a man or a beast. The other characters in the play dismiss him as a "poisonous slave," "savage," and "hag-seed" (Act 1, Scene 2), but that does not mean that the reader must do so as well. Let us take a closer look at Caliban the individual and evaluate the question of his humanity. In the end, I think we will see that Caliban is just as human as the other characters in the play. The first charge against Caliban is his shape. Prospero beckons him come by shouting, "What ho! Slave, Caliban!/ Thou earth, thou, speak!...Come thou tortoise!" Prospero does not even deign to place him among humankind; instead he is called "earth" as if he is part of the very ground-- the dirt that Prospero rules. Later, Trinculo calls him "A strange fish" and Stephano refers to him as a "monster of the isle with four legs." (2,2) Indeed, Caliban is never spoken of without some dehumanizing adjective added to the address. I would, however like to challenge the notion of his ugliness. During Shakespeare's day, there was a very narrow, very specific concept of beauty. For example, a woman was usually considered most beautiful if she was very fair. This showed that she was not exposed to the sun through any type of common labor and thus signified her gentility. To most of Elizabethan England, this concept of beauty was the only concept of beaut... ...ight not all be good ones, are, nevertheless, very human ones. In fact, most of Shakespeare's characters exhibit attributes far worse than Caliban's, yet their humanity is ever called into question. Consider Iago of Othello. Iago exhibited a startling lack of redeeming qualities, yet he was never called a monster. The only reason that Caliban should be called a "monster" lies in the only way he differs from the other characters-- his appearance. It is a shame that, while a modern audiences may question the treatment of Caliban, they do not often question the reason behind it, and by failing to do so, they, along with Prospero become slaves to their own preconceptions. Dale Peterson and Jane Goodall encompassed the lesson that we must learn from Caliban. They said, "By enslaving Caliban, we enslave ourselves. Only when we free Caliban will we free ourselves."

Critical Analysis of Shakespeares Hamlet Essay -- Shakespeare Hamlet

Critical Analysis of Shakespeare's Hamlet What is mans' purpose in life? Is there a purpose? If there isn't, then is it wise to end it, despite the fact that there might be nothing better? In Hamlet, by William Shakespeare, Hamlet struggles with these and other issues. He states that the question of life is "To be, or not to be...?" Is existence really worth the troubles of life? In this monologue, Hamlet is wondering what is his purpose. He asserts that the only reason people endure their horrible lives is the uncertainty of what lies after death. "Who would fardels bear, to grunt and sweat under a weary life, but that the dread of something after death..." Is it noble to suffer, and is life worth all its misery? Hamlet must question himself to discover the answers. At the point in Hamlet when this famous soliloquy takes place, Hamlet has many reasons to be questioning his existence. Hamlet is visited by the ghost of his late father, who explains that he was murdered by Hamlet's uncle, who is Hamlet's mother's new husband. His father cannot rest until Hamlet has gotten revenge. Hamlet's father has just been murdered, his friends are sent to spy on him, his lover is forbidden to see him, and Hamlet feels that his life is pointless and miserable. "The pangs of disprized love, the law's delay, the insolence of office, and the spurns that patient merit of the unworthy takes..." These are the miseries that Hamlet must endure. This is why he makes this s...

To His Coy Mistress - by Andrew Marvel Essay -- English Literature:

To his coy mistress by Andrew Marvel - review. 'To his coy mistress' was written by Andrew Marvel, his exceeding love for his lover, but with closer analysis it is more intimate and is more persuasive. The poem is persuading his mistress to have sex with him, and have children however; it sounds more like he wants the pleasure, not the children. It was written in the 1600s. The poem can be split into 3 stanzas; the first stanza is romantic and flattering, but also persuasive. The implication of the first stanza she is playing hard to get or shy, and the shyness wouldn't matter if they had more time. He is saying he would love her forever and is trying to be romantic, but persuasive. He mentions 'my vegetable love should grow' which could have many implications, because it could refer to a sexual undertone, his love for her is natural or there is slow growing, so the metaphor is quite effective. In some stanzas of the poem he exaggerates because for example, a person would not just sit and admire another person for 'an hundred years' yet the poem says 'an hundre...

Is K-Pop a Good Influence or Bad Influence?

What is K-Pop? K-pop or known as Korean Pop is a new music genre that was originally come from South Korea, Asia. Some say K-pop offered another style of music which has catchier and offer easy listening songs for their lovers. What makes it different too is that the style the singer has shown is something new for us and how they can deliver music on their own way that I believe none of this ever existed before. Just like how they could mix perfectly between the upbeat songs with various kinds of dancing and obviously with their good looking actresses who will make anyone who watch it will fall for them. Good morning Sir/ Madam, today I would like to talk about how K-Pop brings good influences for many teenagers. The love for K-Pop has been spreading widely nowadays, especially in Indonesia. People are arguing whether K-Pop brings a good influence or bad influence for teenagers. Firstly, it is fine for teenagers to like K-pop. I believe to be fond of Korean idol is fine. How could I say so? First, as I read on an article, admiring someone who has professionalism in doing their job will bring a good suggestion to the fans that will suggest the fans to do the same. As it is already a fan's nature for admiring and feeling proud to the attitude of their idol. Being a K-pop artist is really hard, they must have good grade at school because their grades would show whether they are willing to learn or not, and have a good skill that has been examined by the agency and also a good attitude. So that’s why professionalism is the most important thing for being a K-pop artist. This professionalism will enforce teenagers to do so. Fans want to be like their idols, K-Pop idols are showing hard working attitude and how they never give up their dreams and become better as time goes by, for example they undergo packed and brutal training schedule in order for them to be better and better. Thus it will motivates the fans. Another thing that it is already a nature for fans when they love an idol, they'll do everything. Many of K-pop artists are smart, for example is Cho Kyu Hyun who is very smart in Mathematics and has won several Math Olympiads in South Korea, this encourages the fans of Cho Kyu Hyun to study hard as hey are seeing Kyu Hyun as their role model, at the time when Cho Kyu Hyun won several medals he was also in his teenage year, therefore it's easy for fans to look upon him because it suits their situation now. Secondly, teenagers could widen their social intercourse and even knowledge. Why? When someone likes K-pop I can make sure that they will not keep it for her or himself. They will share it with others, for example joining fans gathering, K-pop fans will try to spread the love. By liking K-pop fans usually will always get the latest updates of their idols as a fans' nature is to dig as much as they can as long as it's related to their idols and that will force them to be aware on how to connect themselves with the world that might make them being sophisticated teenagers. Sounds rare? But that’s the truth. Knowing K-pop will make fans curious about South Korea itself, as they will be trying to be closer to their idols as much as they can, they would try to learn South Korea's culture and language, this is useful for teenagers as it could enriches their knowledge about the world outside. Furthermore, I would like to say that K-pop unites the world. Teenagers nowadays are able to meet new friends around the world through K-pop fancafe or social networks as they are sharing the same interests. Having friends overseas are good as they'll be using English since English is the universal language and that would train them to speak English more. Articles about K-pop for international fans are also written in English, therefore fans will try to improve their English as they don't want to miss their idols latest updates. Despite the view from the adults that liking K-pop will cause teenagers to lose their nationalism, as when someone is obsessed about something, they will do everything related to it and by liking K-pop means that teenagers will spend more time in learning about South Korea and forgetting about Indonesia's tradition and culture. Adults have also been saying that K-pop just gives distraction to teenagers. Especially parents think that their children are distracted from their studies as they always think about K-pop, watching videos about K-pop or reading fan fiction and neglect their studies. Another reason that was given by them is because of the consumerism soul of teenagers. It is true that being K-pop fans is not cheap. Even an album that only has 5 songs in it could cost Rp. 200,000 . It is a fans nature that they want to meet their idols so when their idols come, they become desperate to watch the concerts and moreover whenever there's concert, merchandises such as light-stick, banner would be essential for them to cheer their idols and all of those are not cheap. Adults are thinking that it's just wasting money. People are saying that K-pop artists are fake and just motivates teenagers to do plastic surgery in order to look pretty or handsome. They are saying that K-pop is all about plastic surgery, the K-pop artists will do it so they can be pretty or handsome and sometimes it's necessary if they want to have a lot of fans in Korean music industry. I myself believe that nothing is wrong with plastic surgery, why would we accuse someone for being fake only because they did plastic surgery? It's not like they are doing crime. Every person in this world has their own rights, if the K-pop artists want to do it, then it's their rights, it doesn't go against the human rights. Afterall, what is wrong for someone having a desire to have a better look? I don' think that this brings bad influence for teenagers, even in South Korea itself, parents usually give their children plastic surgery as birthday presents and this motivates the children to be a good and well-mannered child if they want to get plastic surgery as their present. So, I strongly believe that there is nothing wrong with it. All of those are true. However it's back to themselves. It's back to their ability to control themselves and to hold their temptation. As long as it's consumed wisely, I believe that K-pop will only bring good influences for teenagers as I myself experience it. In my experience, I believe that K-pop has bring good influences into my life. Despite people saying that K-pop will distract me from my studies, I am very sure that it doesn't. In fact, K-pop is one of the main factors that motivates me to study even harder and keep up good marks. I see K-pop as my motivation, I always think that if I study hard and get good results, in the end I can award myself by going to K-pop concerts or buying their official merchandises. Whenever there's a big exam coming, I always make a note which says something like â€Å"Rank 1 = K-pop Concert† , and it really motivates me. I really respect all the K-pop artists, they sacrifice everything to chase their dreams. There's this one quote that always stuck in my head, â€Å"If you really want one thing, you have to give up on another† , said Lee Tae Min, a member of SHINee. It teaches me that if I really want something, I have to stick to it, be consistent and not easily influenced by others, I have to focus on my aims. Moreover, K-pop teaches me to fight for what I want, just as what Minho, a member of SHINee, korean boy group says, â€Å" If you don't give up your hopes and dreams, then there will always be a good ending. † Thank you for your attention and now I end this speech.

Steve Jobs Leadership Style

Steven Jobs Leadership Style Steven Jobs is a successful strategic leader and the co-founder of Apple Inc. Jobs spent six months at Reed College in Portland, OR before dropping out and spending 18 months dropping in on creative classes. In 1974 he took a job as a technician at Atari Inc. , then left to travel to India in search of spiritual enlightenment. The â€Å"Apple Computer Company† was then formed in 1976. He made great impacts on leading Apple Inc. to become one of the most successful companies in the world. Jobs was fired from Apple in 1985 and founded NeXT Inc. ithin the same year. Jobs purchased The Graphics Group in 1986, which was later renamed Pixar. Disney purchased Pixar in 1996, and Jobs received 7% of Disney shares. In 1996, Apple purchased NeXT for $427 million. Upon the sale of NeXT, Jobs returned to Apple, becoming the interim CEO, which eventually led to his actual chair of CEO. In August 2011, Jobs resigned as CEO of Apple but remained with the company a s chairman of the company’s board. Jobs died at his home in California on October 5, 2011 due to complications from heart attack caused by complications from pancreatic cancer essay writer magic.According to Fortune Magazine, Steve Jobs was â€Å"considered one of Silicon Valley’s leading egomaniacs. † Jobs also made Fortune’s list of America’s toughest bosses referring to his leadership at NeXT. The cofounder of NeXT, Dan’l Lewin, stated, â€Å"The highs were unbelievable†¦But the lows were unimaginable buy essay online reviews. † There are many words to describe Steve Jobs more aggressive side. He was described as willful, driven, aggressive, and stubborn. The late CEO of Apple also seemed hypocritical. He would make fun of someone’s ideas one day and claim them as his own ideas the next day.Many people that worked around him claimed that Jobs created an uncomfortable work environment. Described as immature, stubborn, an d impatient, Jobs did not seem easy to work with. His leadership style was demanding, tense, and aggressive. Although Jobs did not seem like a boss that anyone would want to work for in the office, he seemed to have a better understanding for what the general public wanted. He had a passion for innovation. Cofounding Apple, NeXT, and buying the Graphic Group of Lucasfilms (later name Pixar) Steve Jobs believed highly in innovation.He understood the power of cultural leadership or what the people wanted and where the world was heading. His vision created a company where people were motivated to make great products. Jobs once said, ‘’There's an old Wayne Gretzky quote that I love. ‘I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been. ‘ And we've always tried to do that at Apple. Since the very very beginning. And we always will. ’’ Overall, the leadership style of Steve Jobs was not well liked by the people he worked with. The results of his companies, however, inspired people in the office and people around the world.He was a very proven leader. Even though many might say that he was too intense and hard to deal with, it is hard to say that he was not a good leader. Apple is one of the most profitable companies in the world because of his direction and leadership. Although Jobs had many accomplishments, there are 10 that highlight his career. In 1976, Apple I, the original Apple personal computer, was created. In 1977, Apple II was created and designed to look less like a piece of electronic equipment and more like a home appliance.In 1983, the Apple Lisa was created with a price tag of $10,000. In 1984, the Macintosh was launched during a TV commercial that aired during the Super Bowl. In 1989, NeXT was founded by Steve Jobs and later purchased by Apple in 1996. In 1998, the iMac, as desktop built by Apple, was created. In 2001, the iPod was released and changed how people consume music, and there are now seve ral different models. In 2003, the iTunes Store made its debut. In 2007, the iPhone, an Internet and multimedia-enabled smartphone, was released and there are now 5 generations of the device.In 2010, the iPad tablet computer was created and changed the way electronics can travel. As of November 2012, Apple Inc. had 394 retail stores in 14 countries. Apple made $156 billion on its worldwide annual revenue in 2012, and it has an estimated value of $414 billion as of January 2013. Through Apple, Jobs was widely recognized as a charismatic pioneer of the personal computer revolution. Steven Jobs has been referred to as â€Å"Legend† and described as the â€Å"Father of the Digital Revolution. † Jobs is one of the main reasons technology is what it is today.