A Utilitarian position argues that an action is only right if it is successful in increasing the total happiness of an allotted number of affected individuals. Nevertheless, when the notion to increase the “greater good” includes the potential of killing an innocent human being in order to achieve this, it denotes the moral and ethical integrity of the entire school of thought. This essay will highlight the main ideas of Utilitarianism, the inherent selfishness that individuals have regarding their own acts of utilitarianism, and its inequality. It will be evident that although a Utilitarian position seems justifiable in certain scenarios, there will always be cracks in its moral values in others.

Utilitarianism is based on the idea that the greatest amount of happiness that can be gained for the greatest number of individuals establishes solid grounds for morality. As Jeremy Bentham stated regarding utilitarianism, “The greatest happiness of the greatest number is the foundation of morals and legislation” (Bentham, Jeremy). Nevertheless, it may not be the case because it is unable to explain what happens when the so-called “greater good” does not accurately represent moral righteousness. The utilitarian school of thought is based primarily off of the consequences of the actions, rather than the actions themselves. To a utilitarian, the right action can only be understood by the consequences that that action creates, thus causing a dominant problem in the relationship between what is “good” and what is morally “right” in any given scenario that the utilitarian is given. The problem with this is that even though the anticipated consequence of an action may increase the happiness of some, the action itself, could be of immoral value and could potentially create an ethical dilemma. One of the greatest assets of utilitarianism, however is its emphasize that common sense cannot always be trusted, neither can gut reactions. This causes individuals to look over every consequence t