Which approach to ethics is focused on achieving the greatest good for the largest number of people quizlet?
|
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that determines right from wrong by focusing on outcomes. It is a form of consequentialism. Utilitarianism holds that the most ethical choice is the one that will produce the greatest good for the greatest number. It is the only moral framework that can be used to justify military force or war. It is also the most common approach to moral reasoning used in business because of the way in which it accounts for costs and benefits. However, because we cannot predict the future, it’s difficult to know with certainty whether the consequences of our actions will be good or bad. This is one of the limitations of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism also has trouble accounting for values such as justice and individual rights. For example, assume a hospital has four people whose lives depend upon receiving organ transplants: a heart, lungs, a kidney, and a liver. If a healthy person wanders into the hospital, his organs could be harvested to save four lives at the expense of one life. This would arguably produce the greatest good for the greatest number. But few would consider it an acceptable course of action, let alone the most ethical one. So, although utilitarianism is arguably the most reason-based approach to determining right and wrong, it has obvious limitations. Persistent Vegetative State - one month persistency of an irreversible prognosis; declared after 3 months for a non-traumatic injury, 12 months for a traumatic injury A 25-year-old star outfielder for a major league baseball team (Mr. B) is in an automobile accident. He suffers serious damage to his spinal cord, which causes paralysis of his body from the neck down. Mr. B's thinking, speech, and hearing remain unimpaired, but he has lost all movement of his limbs. He requires the constant assistance of attendants and technology to receive nutrition and expel wastes. After fifteen months of hospital care, his physicians conclude that he has no discernible chance of recovering lost functions and informs him of their conclusions. Mr. B is an intelligent and thoughtful person and thinks a great deal about his future in the weeks that follow disclosure of his prognosis. During this time, he is visited by social and rehab workers at the hospital. These personnel attempt to assure him that because he still possesses his mental facilities, he would eventually accommodate to his injuries and develop some meaningful form of life in the future. Mr. B finally decides on a course of action. He calls his physicians and requests that they discharge him. All parties, the patient included, understand that without hospital facilities death will ensue in several weeks. After hearing the arguments from both sides, the judge rules that Mr. B is in fact making a rational choice. He cites the State of Georgia v. Larry MacAfee in which the Supreme Court of Georgia ruled in 1989 that absent conflicting state interests, competent adults have _______________________. A 25-year-old star outfielder for a major league baseball team (Mr. B.) is in an automobile accident. He suffers serious damage to his spinal cord,
which causes paralysis of his body from the neck down. Mr. B.'s thinking, speech, and hearing remain unimpaired, but he has lost all movement of his limbs. He requires the constant assistance of attendants and technology to receive nutrition and expel wastes. After fifteen months of hospital care, his physicians conclude that he has no discernible chance of recovering lost functions and informs him of their conclusions. Sets with similar terms |
