Introduction
Utilitarianism is a moral hypothesis postulating that a suitable strategy focuses on the general good of the majority in society. It is therefore a type of effectual principle implying that its ensuing effects determine the ethical value of behavior. The main proponents of this premise are believed to be Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Bentham explained utilitarianism as the greatest pleasure or greatest felicity code. Utilitarianism can be viewed as a quantitative examination of moral laws. It can be differentiated from deontological beliefs that do not consider the outcome of an act to be the cause of its ethical value, realistic moral values, and virtue moral codes that focus on personality, over and above other categories of effectual principles (Shaw, 1999).
Categories of Utilitarianism
Two forms of utilitarianism exist that is, Act and rule types. Act utilitarianism suggests that when confronted with options, an individual first reflects on the possible effects of likely events and from that picks what he/she thinks will offer more satisfaction. The rule utilitarian, conversely, starts by examining possible tenets of action. To conclude whether a regulation should be pursued an individual focuses on what would ensue if it were regularly pursued. If loyalty to the regulation generates more pleasure than otherwise then it should be pursued always because it would be ethical. The difference between the two forms of utilitarianism is thus rooted in a distinction concerning the suitable entity of substantial calculation (particular to a case) and universal regulations (Shaw, 1999).
Human Rights Violation
In this essay, three categories of injustices will be analyzed about the Utilitarian theory. The utilitarian theory claims that rationalization of forced labor, persecution, or mass murder would entail idealistically huge paybacks counteracting the direct and severe misery of victims. Utilitarianism would as well need the communal approval of brutal guidelines before execution because universal disquiets and panic could increase if civil rights are frequently disregarded. Forced labor, persecution/harassment, and mass murder/genocide are human violations categories that have always hit the headlines in the local Media. Employees in both public and private sectors undergo some form of torture that can be equated to forced labor. The forms of punishment given to workers, especially in private organizations, are very severe.
Act and rule sorts of utilitarianism vary in the way they view human rights. Rule utilitarianism observes that civil liberty can be regarded as an ethical regulation without a doubt. Act utilitarianism, in contrast, does not recognize civil liberties as ethical values in and of themselves; although that does not imply that they rebuff them completely. Act utilitarian, as clarified over would concur that acts, for instance, slavery and genocide, constantly cause grand despondency and very little pleasure.
Human rights could be regarded as sets of laws. Although persecution may perhaps be suitable under a few situations, as a regulation, it is morally wrong. Act utilitarianism regularly supports civil liberties in a lawful logic since utilitarianism backs regulations that enhance life than those that destroy the very survival of human existence (Rosen, 2003).
Many people around the globe would benefit in case mass murder/genocide is attended to because the utilitarian theory does not provide any justification for it. Scores of individuals have undergone tribulations, especially in the third world due to suffering caused by genocides. Forced labor is not justifiable in the 21st century since each individual has a right to life, equal treatment, and protection from slavery. A good number of the world population will also benefit in case the vice is tackled carefully. Furthermore, forced labor is highly rebuffed by the utilitarian theory because the society would not consent to its execution. Lastly, torture should not be fully abolished because of terrorism and crime. There reaches a time that the only language people understand is violence or torture.
References
- Rosen, F (2003). Classical Utilitarianism from Hume to Mill. London: Routledge, 28.
- Shaw, W (1999). Contemporary Ethics: taking account of utilitarianism. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.