You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
Pages 5 (1255 words)
Brandt and Williams are great philosophers of utiliatarianism. Williams suggested that consequentialism has been popular and perceived to be rational in various societies due to a false impression and refusal of non-consequentialist ideologies…
Although, Williams fails to provide an alternative moral hypothesis, the philosopher successfully investigated how utilitarianism and its backers root for untenable beliefs about what rational actions entail. On the other hand, Brandt emphasizes that when evaluating the repercussions of the value of an ethical belief, the society should go beyond mere appraisal of the gains of following set etiquettes and instead embrace selective fulfillment of the requirements. This can only be achieved by leveraging the benefits and negative consequences of such rules: for instance, one should appreciate remorse and other dangers linked to interiorizing fundamental prohibitions in the society. This paper analyzes the ethical arguments presented in “A Critique of Utilitarianism” by Williams and “Some Merits of One Form of Rule Utilitarianism,” by Bernard Brandt in their respective articles, in order to establish whose utilitarian philosophy is more effective in today’s society. Overview of the philosophers’ perceptions Williams provides an exceptional theory, which defines positive action, based on whether it results in a favorable situation triggers a fundamental conflict between an individual’s ethical capacities and that supposedly right action.
It is notable that in an effort to employ utilitarianism in balancing and sustaining practicality as an ethical theory, Williams points out the surreptitious incorporation of moral feelings that are not purely utilitarian. ...
Not exactly what you need?