Classical utilitarianism is traditionally understood as an ethical doctrine that asserts happiness as the primary value. All human actions are based on the desire for happiness, understood as the maximization of human activity, the maximal avoidance of suffering, and the approximation of the pleasures of life (Alican, 2021). Utilitarianism determines a person’s attitude toward life and his practical decisions.
The first disadvantage of utilitarianism is that people who adhere to the concept avoid suffering. Every person, at least once in his or her life, has to experience grief. If a person avoids suffering in every way possible, sooner or later, it will catch up with him and break him. A person not prepared to experience negative emotions can shut himself off from the world, stop enjoying the little things, and live a full life.
A further disadvantage of this theory is that it is based on pleasure rather than virtue. For some people, pleasure may be what, but suffering for others. Thus, a person can become selfish because pleasure is above all things to him. He will not care whether it harms someone or how others feel when they do certain things. It is important to observe the line since living for pleasure makes sense. Thus, from this disadvantage comes a privilege: focusing on pursuing happiness. It is on one’s sense of self that one’s life and actions are built. People who are supporters of utilitarianism are the most joyful in life; they look at the world more simply.
People have been taught since ancient times that suffering is an integral part of human life. More recently, people have moved away from this belief and realized that their lives are not battles for a place in the world, suffering, and grief. A person’s life can be full of color, positive events, and joy. People who understand this strive to live their lives in such a way that it is filled with true happiness.
The categorical imperative implies treating human beings as ends in themselves. The founder of German classical philosophy, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), was disgusted with a morality that could justify everything, and he believed morality should be more principled (Piper et al., 2018). Good and evil must be clear; there can be no relativism, nothing relative. Kant formulates a categorical imperative, an unconditional norm that cannot be violated.
It is a privilege of the categorical imperative that its concept calls for treating man as a goal. Man, as a rational being, is a goal in himself. Hence, no one should treat him as a means to his end. People must respect one another in order to build a truly just society. A further privilege of this theory may be that man has the right to free will. Each person is independent in their views of life and beliefs. This formula defines the moral behavior of the individual as a citizen, an actual member of the rule of law, who freely obeys the laws of society because he has participated in their adoption or at least approves of them.
The great disadvantage of this theory is that free will is far from always subject to moral law. A person who decides, and feels complete freedom of action, may go on to commit the gravest crimes because he will believe that he is allowed to do anything. This is why it is necessary to control the concept and place limits on free will.
In my personal life, the theory of utilitarianism partially fits. I believe one should experience as much pleasure and joy as possible in life, and achieving true happiness is the primary goal of human existence. It is very important to observe moral principles that will not allow harm to others in order to achieve one’s pleasure. I believe suffering is one part of human life that cannot be completely eradicated. I draw experience from negative events, which helps me build a happy life in the future.
References
Alican, N. F. (2021). Classical Utilitarianism before John Stuart Mill: The Legacy of Jeremy Bentham. In Mill’s Principle of Utility: Origins, Proof, and Implications (pp. 13-91). Brill. Web.
Piper, A. M., Waibel, V. L., Ruffing, M., & Wagner, D. (2018). The Logic of Kant’s Categorical “Imperative”. Natur und Freiheit: Akten des XII. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses, 5, 2037-46. Web.