A Crisis

Although I have a great many more important, albeit more mundane, things to be doing right now, I feel a need to write, in order to sort out my thoughts.

I have identified as a utilitarianist since this summer, and I made utilitarian decisions prior to then, just not knowing how to label my system of ethics. Utilitarianism has not failed me; I find its mathematical approach very appealing and logical and its emphasis on happiness well placed.

However.
I do not support the death penalty in any circumstance.
I think developed societies have a responsibility to provided welfare and healthcare for their citizens.
I think some human rights are fundamental.

If you do not yet see the issue with this, I will spell it out. A utilitarianist believes that it is ethical to make the decision that helps the greatest number of people or harms the least, even if it compromises the rights of an individual or a group. I am lately coming to think certain human rights are uncompromisable, though there are very few rights that fit into this category.

So therein lies my dilemma. I still stand behind utilitarianist ethics in most situations, but I am for the first time seeing a gaping hole in my own argument. I do not yet know how to reconcile the idea of certain inalienable rights with a system that consistently compromises them in the interest of the greater good. I will keep you posted, dear readers, as I come to my conclusion.

Bentham and his Buddies

I adore the Philosophical Radicals. If you don't know who they are, or you need a refresher course, you're in the right place! They were a group of Englishmen most inspired and led by Jeremy Bentham, founder of the utilitarian school of ethics. Utilitarianists believe that the ethicality of an action is determined by its effect on overall happiness. Whatever action will (A) make the most people the happiest or (B) make the least people the least unhappy, is the ethical thing to do. 

Around the year 1820, the Philosophical Radicals gave themselves their title. One of this group's strongest tenets is the value of deductive reasoning. They rejected all arguments based on history and custom. Only an argument structured logically from the ground up (root=radical) held any weight to them. In this way, they helped determine the future of philosophy. Skeptical of almost everything, from the church to the military to social convention, they demanded reforms everywhere.

So, basically, these guys were BA. And epic. And all other fantastic terms that could be applied to something so beyond awesome that words pale. Kudos, Bentham, and the like-minded types.