Old and New Testaments Criticisms of Utilitarianism
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
Old and New Testaments Criticisms of Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism has been criticized for not being practical or timely in weighing the consequences of one’s actions prior to
engaging in the conduct. Mill replies that if we wish to guide our conduct by Christianity, for example, there is no time to
read through the Old and New Testaments before taking any action. Therefore, “the course of experience” helps guide
actions in assessing probable outcomes.15 There does not need to be a complex or prolonged weighing of likely
consequences as a person gains experience with such decisions; there simply needs to be reflection based on past
experience and the experience of others.
Utilitarianism has also been criticized because it is believed that people will weigh the consequences of their actions in
a self-serving way, always ending up doing things in their own self-interest. Mill agrees that the intellect and virtue of
individuals vary and that difficult decisions are unavoidable. “There exists no moral system under which there do not
arise unequivocal cases of conflicting obligation. These are the real difficulties, the knotty points both in the theory of
ethics, and in the conscientious guidance of personal conduct.”16 Nevertheless, it is possible to weigh alternative consequences objectively, and this is the only way to ensure ethical conduct.
Sometimes utilitarianism has been summarized in a shorthanded way, declaring that the end justifies the means,
suggesting that as long as the outcome results in happiness, it is acceptable to use any means to obtain it. This is not
necessarily true under the principle of utility because the end would have to result in greater total happiness to justify the use of means that might cause pain. This reasoning again draws a clear distinction from virtue ethics, which would
not accept this rule because a morally good end cannot be served by means that are not themselves morally good.
Aristotle would say that “the ends justify the means” is a maxim of expediency, not of virtue. If immoral means are used,
the ends achieved are also morally impermissible.17
Ethical conduct is enforced according to utilitarianism by individual hope of favor (reward or pleasure) or fear of
displeasure (penalty or pain) from others, or from God. Ultimately, a “society between equals can only exist on the
understanding that the interests of all are to be regarded equally. . . . In this way people grow up unable to conceive as possible to
Old and New Testaments Criticisms of Utilitarianism
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow