Critiques of Utilitarianism and Moral Philosophy

The following passage describes the philosophical underpinnings of utilitarianism and its critiques:

Utilitarianism, a consequentialist ethical theory initially articulated by philosophers such as Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, posits that the best action is the one that maximizes overall happiness or utility. This doctrine emphasizes the outcome of actions rather than intentions. While utilitarianism has been praised for its democratic appeal—by advocating for actions that benefit the majority—it has also faced significant critiques. Critics argue that this approach, in focusing solely on outcomes, can justify morally questionable actions if they lead to a greater overall good. They contend this perspective overlooks the intrinsic value of individuals, reducing them to mere instruments for achieving collective happiness.

Moreover, some philosophers have posited alternative ethical frameworks, such as deontology, which emphasizes duties or principles over consequences, suggesting that certain actions may be inherently wrong regardless of their outcomes. Such critiques highlight a fundamental tension within ethical philosophy between the perceived necessity of utility maximization and the equally vital importance of individual rights and moral duties.