NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Utilitarianism (1) Utilitarianism is the philosophical concept, which emphasizes the superiority of utilitarian value over any other aspects of human existence. Basically, its proponents suggest that the true moral value consists of everything that increases the amount of happiness, for as many people as possible. Still, since the essence of happiness is perceived differently by different people, there always used to be a lot of controversy, surrounding utilitarianism, as the ethical teaching. There are two main schools, within the Utilitarianism, which offer a bit different approach, while suggesting of what kind of principle needs to be used, to achieve the best results the rule utilitarianism and act utilitarianism.
The proponents of the first one are in favour of sticking up to the certain set of rules, while defying the conventional morality, so that the things will not get out of hand. The rule utilitarianism overlooks the immediate effects of its own application, as the criteria for decision making. This is because, in the long run, such effects might become associated with something different, from what they originally were meant to be. That is why, the rule utilitarianism is about applying some abstract rules, in order to bring happiness for the people.
This theory is more socially focused, since it pays a lot of attention to the fact that the consequences of our actions bring the element of instability, into the otherwise perfect theory of act utilitarianism. The act Utilitarianism, on the other hand, suggests that the people must make their decisions, according to the directly consequential model. Its apologists rightly suggest that if we make too many provisions and follow too many rules, the hedonist principle, which defines the Utilitarianism as the concept, will cease to remain as decisive factor, when it comes to decision making. This is because, otherwise, we could never fully predict all possible consequences of our actions. Act utilitarianism suggests many innovative approaches of how to decrease the amount of happiness by decreasing the amount of suffering, which are being referred to as immoral. But those who declare this, cannot defend their point logically, and always descent to the emotional level of argumentation, while making their statements.
Actually, the act utilitarianism is closer related to the negative utilitarianism, because strives to eliminate the suffering by physical methods. This, often means, going directly after the carriers of suffering. (2) The case of Mr. Hamidi vs Intel can be thought of in terms of both, rule and the act utilitarianism's. In this essay we will focus on analysing it from the rule utilitarianism point of view. Basically, because of his belief that he was able to change things for better, for the employees of Intel, he committed an illegal act of email spamming.
It cannot escape our attention that Mr. Hamidi is the representative of ethnic minorities, which demand more and more privileges for themselves, simply because they believe that they were being mistreated, in historical context of this word. Therefore, the whole premise that the main motive for his actions was caring about his fellows employees, appears to be more than doubtful. He simply has his personal agenda, which appears to be taking a revenge against the Intel corporation. But let us assume that he is actually what he wants us to believe. He acted on behalf on his fellows employees, but what kind of employees?
The text leaves no doubt about it: He alleges that the company is guilty of age and disability discrimination. In another words, he acts on behalf of people, who represent a minority. There is no doubt that these people have the right to be treated fairly. But their fair treatment should not affect the regular employees and also, it should not have a negative impact on the Intel customers. Because if this was the case, the quality of Intel products would sink drastically, while leading to the situation, when millions of people would suffer from it. The well being of a few physically challenged individuals, at Intel, cannot be considered as the policy making factor for the Intel, because it is a commercial enterprise, which is focused on making profits.
Also, if employees' disabilities are of genetic nature, keeping them at work and paying them salary, is a crime against nature, since it prevents other healthy and educated people from applying for the same position. The act utilitarianism strives to predict the development of every situation, using a scientific methods. And, because of this, it often disregards ethical factors that are based on the conventional morality. If we use the act utilitarian logic, it will become clear to us that the negative consequences of a special treatment for the disabled employees, outweighs the positive one.
Therefore, it must be considered as inappropriate, although, according to the humanistic point of view, nothing can be more important than the welfare of one individual. Mr. Hamidi's case is the classic example of rule utilitarianism theory in action. It allows us to to foresee the future results of Intel changing its employment policy. While benefiting a few, it would have an overall negative effect. Therefore, we can only approve the court's decision, which described Hamidi's action as email spamming, instead of referring to them as free expression of one's opinions.
Hamidi increased the amount of unhappy people, because he failed to achieve his goal to help the disabled employees, after having given them a false hope. He also annoyed those who never wanted anything to do with him or with his organization. He prevented many employees from properly executing their duties, because they were emotionally disturbed by his letters. This resulted in them being unable to fully concentrate on their work. Also, he created a precedent, where the employees, who were being laid off, because of their professional inadequacy, will be tempted to describe it as a some form of discrimination. This will have a negative effect on all industries in U.
S. , especially given the fact that the media will do their best to blow this story out of proportion. Bibliography: Magee, Mike Intel vs Hamidi: E-mail Case Continues. July 24, 2000. The Register. November 25, 2006. web
Free research essays on topics related to: rule utilitarianism, decision making, conventional morality, negative effect, point of view
Research essay sample on Point Of View Rule Utilitarianism
