Is It Irrational Not to Be a Consequentialist Essay

Is It Irrational Not to Be a Consequentialist - Essay Example Thus, there is the establishment that the kind of action taken by the individual, either upright or rather morally acceptable behavior is what leads to the result. However, it also states that in the presence of morally wrong behavior, it does account for any bad or rather deeming consequences. In the paper, there is the clear exploration of the question whether it is irrational not to be of the consequentialism mind. The question is definitely one asked by people over ages and many are times that an ideal answer has lacked to emerge. Most people are of the concept that a person who sides with the consequentialism ideology is irrational. This is, however, not always true, as only the pessimists look at the ideology in that manner. â€Å"This is explained in that the thought of it being irrational is fueled by the thought of a consequence that will be very detrimental. It would hurt either the performer of the action or even the people that will be pretentious of the action either di rectly or indirectly† (Mill, 2008, 77). This basis is not legitimate on its own because of poor or ignored review of the other concept of thought and consequences of actions. This supports the notion that goes by the adage that the result of something is clearly justified by the means used to achieve it. On the other hand, there are those that are clearly optimistic by thinking that despite the manner or the method used to get to a point, the mind ought to fathom the consequences. Irrational not to be on the consequentialism ideology describes the optimists vividly. â€Å"As they are described, they just carry out their activities without the perception of the looming danger in case the idea or the project they may be contemplating working out may not conceive the desired conclusion† (Singer, 2006, 49). One of the well-known scientists in the field of human perception, Professor T.M focused his views on the issue using the concept of human rights. â€Å"The professor w as recognized to be very thorough in his explanation. He did this in an effort to explain the nature of both the ones who term the ideology irrational and rational† (Scheffler, 2004, 167). The professor explained clearly that if a person has the right to carry out a certain desired act knowing it will not endanger other people; the consequences of exercising rights are self and hence, there is the allowing of the practice. In the review of this subject matter, focusing on the general ideology is not convincing and detailed enough. Hence, the scrutiny by breaking it down to the various philosophies that comprise the general ideology of consequentialism has to happen. One of the comprising philosophies is Utilitarianism. â€Å"A famous historian by the name of Jeremy Bentham was known for his advocacy of the concept. In his explanation of the philosophy, he claimed that for a human to take a certain course of action, there are two main perceptions that linger in his mind. One o f them is gratification, while the one is misery† (Samuel, 2007, 127). The historian stated that the searching of pleasure could make a person go through misery as long as the result was going to be pleasure. For example a mass murderer who goes out on a killing spree to satisfy his pleasure of seeing people suffering. â€Å"With this notion, it is thus noted that this form of utilitarianism describes a member irrational to be a consequentialist†

Extra cridit Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Extra cridit - Essay Example This is one of the most applied contemporary philosophies, since it explains human behavior, morality and decision-making. The theory classifies motives of people into three broad descriptions, which are the ego, the id and the super-ego. This theory also categorizes various personalities and answers the question why people are different. The main theory that guides this contention is determinism theory, which argues that the past, the present and the future are all interconnected. Arguably, another key theory that is also universally applicable developed by Sigmund Freud, is the human psyche theory. These theories are connectable to various political situations and numerous people have tried to implement these theories in a political context. By nature, most people argue that Sigmund Freud was a conservative. However, throughout his life, he underwent various first hand mistreatments from the politicians, such as the invasion of his house by Nazi Germany troops when he was in his la te seventies. Sigmund’s psychoanalytic theory holds a variety of views. Primarily, the philosopher indicates that the nature of decisions we make, or the type of personality we exhibit is located in three parts of our minds, which are the ego, super ego and the id. ... From the id, Freud introduces the ego, which operates under the principal of reality. In this contention, the philosopher argues that the ego works to satisfy the wants of the brain, through socially acceptable ways. As such, the ego is in touch with reality and functions to control our intrinsic desires to a context that is socially acceptable. From the ego, Freud then introduces the super-ego, which is more complex, and acquired as during a person’s lifetime. Behaviors that people in the society view as good or bad are inscribed in our super ego. Thus, the super-ego suppresses our morally unacceptable desires from the id and cultivates good behavior and morality from the ego. It thus works to ensure that the id operates under morality, and that the ego operates on idealism as opposed to reality. Though this is a psychoanalytic theory developed to assist people understand the various desires and personalities of people, it has been a guiding principle in the development of nu merous political philosophies. For instance, it is evident that theories such as idealism and realism are derived from this psychoanalytic theory. Freud’s introduction about reality and about idealism are the birthing principles for most political theories. Idealism and realism are two philosophies that could be held by leaders. The philosophy each leader holds determines the social and economic development limits of a nation. Idealists believe that things should be as one wants them to be, hence pushing people to pursue their desires in socially acceptable ways, whereas realism holds the argument that things have to be practical and pragmatic,