The Lifeboat Case And Utilitarianism Free Essay Example

Imagine that four men are placed in a life or death situation. They are stranded in a boat in the middle of the ocean with nothing to eat for nourishment. In a severely weakened state, the men decide that for the benefit of the majority they will draw lots and eat whoever draws the shortest; one of the men refuses to draw. The next day, in spite of the lottery, the youngest boy is killed and fed on by the other men.

The argument proposed to justify their actions is that the young boy, sick from malnourishment and from drinking seawater, would have died anyway.

Also, were it not for the cabin boy’s body, the other three men would not have survived. The principle of utility is called into question with this particular case because it is used to justify the killing of the young boy. According to utilitarian reasoning, the benefit of saving three peoples lives outweighs the value of the loss of one life.

Utilitarianism is a theory of justice whose highest principle is to maximize happiness and utility: “The basic idea of utilitarianism is simple: the right thing to do is what produces the most good” (Mill, 15).

The “most good” can be understood in terms of happiness, or the greater amount of pleasure than of pain. Therefore, utilitarians measure the consequences of actions by how much the results bring happiness to the greatest amount of people. The best alternative to any situation is the one that produces the greatest net utility.

According to John Stuart Mill, “”Utility” or the “greatest happiness principle” holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (16). Therefore, whatever produces the most good is considered to be just.

The utilitarian perspective supports` the killing of the young boy by the three men because the “good” that comes from the survival of the three men is greater than having all of the men die from starvation. Especially when taking into consideration the fact that the death of the three men opposed to one young boy could potentially affect more people. Justice, therefore, depends on utility and the greater good: “The essential features of justice on the utilitarian scheme are these:

It acknowledges the existence of individual rights which are to be supported by society” (21). Mills notes the protection of rights, but also suggests how justice in terms of these individual rights can be overridden with inequality when it promotes a greater good. The problem with this utilitarian justification is that the worth and value of this young boy’s life is being determined. Being rescued only a few days after the incident, there is no definite way of knowing that the young boy couldn’t have survived. Also, the question of justice is addressed with this situation because the boy was killed without his prior permission and consent.

His individual rights were dismissed and overshadowed, while the happiness of the majority of the men was taken into account. In this instance, the accepted standard of justice concerning individual rights and liberties are violated: “This utilitarianism appears to require that I break a promise or even harm someone any time more “good” could be accomplished by doing so” (22). This idea of loss for some for the direct benefit or profit of others possesses the power to contradict accepted and common moral standards and intuitions held within society.

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get a custom paper by one of our expert writers.

Get your custom essay

Helping students since 2015