Also called the happiness principle, which “provides a quasi-mathematical, bias free, and theoretically motivated way of working out what we ought to do in literally any moral situation” (Bailey and Martin, 91). Thus, the happiness principle, created by Bentham and further developed by Mill, states that sentience is society’s most morally important attribute. If an individual can save multiple lives by risking one, it should be done according to utilitarianism because the action will result in happiness for the bystander. The theory continues to enforce the idea that “the greatest happiness principle has had a large share in forming the moral doctrines even of those who most scornfully reject its authority” (Bailey and Martin, 96), proving that even those who do not think they agree or believe in utilitarianism and its values live by the moral doctrine of the happiness principle. Although some may refuse to live by the principles of utilitarianism, it is clear that the happiness principle is one that is often unknowingly or unwillingly observed. An individual saving five lives in exchange for one is an action that should result in happiness due to the action being committed for the greater good of society. According to utilitarianism, it is immoral to let the five people die in exchange for the one life on the other track because five is greater than one. Therefore, it is immoral to allow the train to take its natural path due to the fact that the number of lives lost is not in the best interest for society. In the second scenario, utilitarianism states that one should throw the bigger man over the bridge in order to stop the train and save five lives. Although this scenario may appear to be cruel, it is in theory the same as the first scenario and has the same reasoning as previously mentioned. The
Also called the happiness principle, which “provides a quasi-mathematical, bias free, and theoretically motivated way of working out what we ought to do in literally any moral situation” (Bailey and Martin, 91). Thus, the happiness principle, created by Bentham and further developed by Mill, states that sentience is society’s most morally important attribute. If an individual can save multiple lives by risking one, it should be done according to utilitarianism because the action will result in happiness for the bystander. The theory continues to enforce the idea that “the greatest happiness principle has had a large share in forming the moral doctrines even of those who most scornfully reject its authority” (Bailey and Martin, 96), proving that even those who do not think they agree or believe in utilitarianism and its values live by the moral doctrine of the happiness principle. Although some may refuse to live by the principles of utilitarianism, it is clear that the happiness principle is one that is often unknowingly or unwillingly observed. An individual saving five lives in exchange for one is an action that should result in happiness due to the action being committed for the greater good of society. According to utilitarianism, it is immoral to let the five people die in exchange for the one life on the other track because five is greater than one. Therefore, it is immoral to allow the train to take its natural path due to the fact that the number of lives lost is not in the best interest for society. In the second scenario, utilitarianism states that one should throw the bigger man over the bridge in order to stop the train and save five lives. Although this scenario may appear to be cruel, it is in theory the same as the first scenario and has the same reasoning as previously mentioned. The