Utilitarianism

I do not think that Utilitarianism defines happiness well. What is most “useful” is not always what will make us the happiest. We may find immense pleasure in spending hours laying on a beach or reading books or magazines with little to no educational value. These activities are hardly useful. They do not contribute to “The Greatest Happiness Principle.” Happiness is something that each individual has to decide for themselves. It is easy to look at the world overall and accept the principle of the most good for the most people, but as an everyday person, I have a right to worry about my personal happiness. Utilitarianism is rational to a fault. It focuses simply on the consequences of actions and how to make most people happy. While the consequences of actions may be the main focus, it is important to note what people’s intentions were. If I am always aiming to do evil, but the consequences are positive or minimal, my morality should not be considered of a high standard. Utilitarianism is the kind of mindset a leader of a nation may have, but the average person would dislike. It is a useful mindset if you have a lot of people within your care. That way you can focus on a majority and decide on actions that will result in positive consequences for them. Being a leader is not so much a matter of morality, but getting the job done. Otherwise, this philosophy is hard to take into an everyday situation. I do not entirely agree with Kant either, though. While good intentions are necessary to have good morals, the consequences are certainly important in how they affect society. I believe that the agent, the action, and the consequent should all be moral.