Utilitarianism Is Fair Right Or Wrong
R. M. Hare is a Professor at Oxford University that specializes on the topic of Moral
Philosophy. Among his studies as a philosopher, he proclaims that moral philosophy
depend on the meaning of philosophy itself. For instance, if philosophers have tried
to clearly certain concepts presented in life so does moral philosophy. In other word
moral philosophy is where the problems on which it tries to shed lights are practically
issued about morality. So philosophers would question the idea of what is fair , right
or wrong and so on.
Throughout the interview with R.M. Hare on the topic of moral philosophy with the
interviewee Bryan Magee, Hare repeatedly goes back to the idea of utilitarianism and
how the benefit of one thing should go to the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Pacifism is when a person is not in favor of fighting, violence, and/or war. For
example, if a group of bullies, let s say two to three, sees a person, that they know
is a pacifist, and start throwing punches. The people will most certainly not stop
pouncing the guy until they are satisfied. Additionally, Professor Hare claims that
pacifism is unjustified, and as such they contain flues in them that makes them
unjust. An example that was stated in the reading, regards the predicament of a
pacifist during a state of war. In a state of war, usually the male adults would go to
the battlefield, whereas the elders and females stay and contribute within factories,
medical camps, etc. However, Hare believes that, for example, If the American
government, or anybody else, had a principle which required them to do that kind
of thing, then this was an argument for abandoning the principle. And I think that
they would have abandoned it if the had... (P.139). Thus, Hare believe that such a
principle is bound to end. As his example state that during a war that is when
people s duty as citizen comes to play, and in such a state people are bound to
break their principle, such as pacifism, and follow their duty. Furthermore, Hare
claims, on page 140, that the consequences of pacifism is that, everybody in my
position...have such a principle would be much worse that the consequence of
having the principle which I do in fact have, which allows me to fight in certain war
(P.140). So, in times of need, such a principle will end up misleading and at such
principles as pacifism, people s actions will be unjustified. Ultimately, the practice is
not boundless to