IndexMajor Strengths and Weaknesses of UtilitarianismStrengths of Utilitarianism: Strengths of Utilitarianism: Mill's Theory of Hedonistic Utilitarianism BenthamConclusionUtilitarianism as a moral theory suggests that actions are described as morally right or morally wrong based on their utility values; right if their utility value leads to maximum pleasure or happiness and wrong if their overall utility value leads to maximum pain or sadness. Like any moral theory, utilitarianism has its strengths and weaknesses. Utilitarianism is said to be universal when its standard principles are acceptable and applicable in different cultural contexts around the world. On the other hand, utilitarianism is structurally defined as impartial when the weight of the utility value or consequences of an action remains constant or impartial among the multiple subjects it affects. We say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Major Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism Strengths of Utilitarianism: Focus on overall well-being: Utilitarianism emphasizes maximizing overall well-being or happiness. It gives priority to the collective well-being of individuals, aiming to create the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. This focus on the general good can promote a sense of social harmony and fairness. Objectivity and impartiality: Utilitarianism offers a relatively objective and impartial framework for decision making. It encourages people to consider the consequences of their actions and evaluate them based on their overall impact on happiness. This emphasis on impartiality can help avoid bias and promote fairness. Flexibility and Pragmatism: Utilitarianism is a flexible theory that allows for the consideration of different factors and circumstances. It takes into account the specific context and potential consequences of actions, providing a pragmatic approach to ethical decision making. Promoting altruism and social well-being: Utilitarianism encourages individuals to act in ways that benefit others and promote social well-being. By prioritizing the happiness and well-being of all, it fosters a sense of altruism, empathy, and concern for the greater good. Weaknesses of Utilitarianism: Challenge in Measuring Happiness: One of the significant criticisms of utilitarianism is the difficulty in objectively measuring happiness. or well-being. Quantifying and comparing happiness between individuals or groups is a complex task, as happiness is subjective and can vary greatly from person to person. This challenge undermines the practicality of implementing utilitarian principles. Potential for injustice toward minority groups: Utilitarianism's focus on maximizing overall happiness may overlook the needs and rights of minority groups or individuals. Emphasis on the happiness of the majority could lead to marginalization or oppression of minority interests or violation of individual rights if it results in sacrificing their well-being for the greater good. Lack of consideration for rights and justice: Critics argue that utilitarianism places insufficient emphasis on individual rights and justice. In some situations, following utilitarian principles might require violating individual rights or engaging in unjust actions if they produce the greatest overall happiness. This conflict with principles of fairness and justice is a significant concern for opponents of utilitarianism. Failure to take intrinsic values ​​into account: Utilitarianism tends to focus on valueinstrumental analysis of actions – how they contribute to overall happiness – rather than considering intrinsic values, such as the intrinsic moral value of certain actions. This limitation fails to take into account the meaning of individual rights, autonomy, and other non-consequentialist ethical principles. Unrealistic Demands and Calculations: Utilitarianism often requires individuals to make complex calculations and predictions about the consequences of their actions. These calculations may involve evaluating multiple factors, anticipating future outcomes, and considering long-term effects. The practical challenges and uncertainties involved in making such calculations can make utilitarianism difficult to apply in real-life decision making. Mill and Bentham's theory of hedonistic utilitarianismHedonic utilitarianism defines the moral rightness or wrongness of actions based on the resulting net utility of the action performed as that the right course of actions leads to the net utility value of the highest pleasure while the wrong action leads to the lowest net utility value of pleasure. In this case the overall balance between pain and pleasure equals the utility of an action, and this is what defines hedonism. Furthermore, when utilitarianism is said to be about maximizing outcomes, it applies to the situation in which an agent performing an action selects only actions with optimal net utility values ​​for pleasure or pain depending on the desired outcome. Maximizing outcomes in this case has everything to do with choosing the action with the highest net utility value. Also known as the “Happiness Calculus,” Bentham's hedonic calculus is a standard methodology for calculating quantitative net utility values ​​of actions based on seven standard elements that define action experiences. According to Bentham, to arrive at the deontic status of an action it is necessary to use a checklist of seven items to calculate the utility of the action. The first two elements, which are the most fundamental from the purely quantitative aspect of hedonic utility, are the intensity and duration of the action in question. The intensity and duration of action experiences depend on the idea that pain and pleasure can be measured by establishing a common unit of measurement of both pain and pleasure that can be used, under similar conditions, to classify pleasure experiences and pain such that each classification is relative to each other on a common cardinal scale. The remaining five items on the utilitarian calculus checklist are: certainty and uncertainty; fertility; proximity and distance; purity; and extension.Mill is critical of Bentham's method of hedonic calculus and Bentham's quantitative utilitarianism by extension because the purely quantitative premise of the method. Mill argues that basing human mental states of pleasure and pain solely on intrinsic quantitative measures of intensity and duration, without considering the underlying quality of experiences, is a mockery of the developed capacity of the human mind. If so, Mill argues that Bentham's hedonic calculus calculates the net utility of actions primarily based on the resulting duration and intensity of experiences of pain or pleasure, which are only or primarily bodily experiences. According to Mill, human beings are very sophisticated creatures whose sense of pleasure and pain cannot under any circumstances be limited to bodily pleasures such as eating, massaging the body, or having sex. Mill argues that Bentham's hedonic calculus is limited to primitive creatures such as pigs and pigs because it assumes that humans experience only bodily pleasures and pains, and therefore only intensity and duration can explain net utility.