Friday, October 2, 2015
Misunderstandings
The past couple of classes we have talked about John Stewart Mill and Utilitarianism. Basically, utilitarianism is a form of Hedonism meaning they try to maximize pleasure and minimize pain. Consequentialism is also linked with utilitarianism by meaning that is derives a moral worth of an action from its consequences. I think my favorite thing we talked about is the Greatest Happiness Principle which states that actions are morally good in as much as they produce the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people. To me, this is a very unselfish rule. To abide by the Greatest Happiness Principle, you have to be compassionate for others and well educated. You put your own happiness on the back burner in order to provide more happiness for more people. That is a truly unselfish deed. The fourth misunderstanding claims that happiness cannot be the rational aim of life because it is unobtainable. I disagree with this statement and more so agree with Mills response to it, everyone could have a life full of happiness if society was arranged like that and that the two factors of unhappiness are selfishness and lack of mental cultivation. If you wake up every morning, go to the job that you love to support the family that you love, how could you not be happy (given that you don't have a terrible disease or other theoretical things)? You're not being selfish by providing for your family and you are smart enough to have a career that you love, therefore overcoming the sources of unhappiness. Society isn't centered around happiness- all you hear on the news are of crimes, poverty and attacks; if the news talked about happier things I think society would change and hopefully then the center could be happiness.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The last bit, about the news covering happier things--that part has really caught my interest! I know that sometimes, a given news channel will tell a positive or uplifting story, and I'm sure there are various websites with articles on positive stories, though they may not get as much traffic as they deserve! Why does the news tell us what it tells us? To keep us informed, yes; but informed of what--besides weather and sports, for example. The news reports atrocities in order to make people aware of them, in hopes that, then, people can be on guard to protect themselves (whether by avoiding an area, or taking protective measures when in that area) or know where to send help or simply to understand circumstances that turn out to be the end of a chain-reaction--the impact that such events can have on society. However, I do think that it is all too easy to fall into the trap of sensationalism--finding what will draw in the most viewers and therefore be the best "lead story." As a cynical news anchor said to his co-workers in an episode of the TV show The Pretender, "If it bleeds, it leads." It really would be great if every news channel could designate a given time to review uplifting, positive stories, wouldn't it? While I don't know if that would dissuade lawbreakers, it certainly could help improve national morale!
ReplyDelete