Is happiness the right standard for morality at all? Utilitarianism weighs the unhappiness of one person against the happiness of another, and philosophers argue that it isn't concerned with people as individuals, but as 'receptacles for happiness,' which fails to treat them with proper respect.
The distribution of happiness (who gets happy by how much) is irrelevant, and this fails to respect justice. e.g.) One person would be happy to have their family around them, whereas another might want to have a bigger house or a nicer car as well as having their family around them.
Kant argued that happiness (or satisfying people's preferences) is not always morally good. e.g.) The happiness child abusers get from hurting children is morally bad, and the fact that the abusers are deriving happiness from this doesn't make the action better at all, in fact, it is made worse. Therefore, there must be another standard for what is morally good.

	Erstellt von Summer Pearce vor mehr als 10 Jahre

AS - Level (Year 1) Ethics (Utilitarianism) Folienset am What is Utilitarianism?, erstellt von Summer Pearce am 19/05/2016.