評功利主義　　　
   
   龍緯汶　1995年1月
   
   

   
   Introduction
   
   
   
   Utilitarian try to make appropriate assessment and offer a simple basis to different value pledge by suggesting utilitarianism as a method. Utilitarianism is one of the anterior kinds systematic political study of truth. The most effective earliest utilitarian were J~S.Mute and Behtham, a British who had also brought the dogma into the field of law. He based his explanation on the assumption that the fundamental purpose in life is to avoid pain and attain gratification. He rejects all of the rationales based on faith or morality and manufactures his view on the bottom of utility.
   
   
   
   
   
   Orientation of utilitarianism
   
   
   
   It dated back to the time that the Enlightenment Movement spread near all over Europe. There were the rise of urbanization and industrialization in the in the cities and the processes of production respectively. Meanwhile, because the living standard of people rose, their basic needs were satisfied and much of their workload was reinforced by machines, they had more time to think about something’s that they had ignored for hundreds of years, for examples, economic structure in trading, political structure of the government and the pattern of wealth sharing, a series of the idealization processes took place in thinking. As a result, utilitarianism rose.
   
   
   
   
   
   Decision-making
   
   
   
   The most important concern for the utilitarian is to make decision (which is made according to one’s appetite, figures about the feasibility or cost of realizing one’s goals and criteria.), for individual and collectivity according to fair value appraisement, that is, chances, as resources in the world are restrained. According to value pluralism, different people have distinct value and it is what one thinks as essential in one’s life and the accumulated name standing for one’s preferences, taste, warrant and moral standard.
   
   
   
   
   
   Value and the modern value
   
   
   
   Value exists because of the basic instants of human beings (that is to choose which thing to do first according to rationality.). Political thinkers always argue if there should be some values that are more precious than the others. If there are, why are they so? Value is also about right or wrong, good or bad. But how come the fair value computation judging these issues? Is the answer inborn moral standard (through inherited tradition or religion beliefs)? Or the standard arrived if people are acting rationally in the society (according to the best interest of the society.)? Value varies as living condition differs. Modern value is the measurement of the common value in the society.
   
   
   
   Criteria of different political issues in the view of utilitarianism
   
   
   
   The conservative answer is utility (public interest) which is the happiness of human beings. Utilitarian, similar to the view of the secularists, highlight human happiness, but not morality or the words of God. They favor secular living standard, rather than the sacred one. In conclusions, utility is an act that is morally right if it can produce the greatest happiness.
   
   
   
   
   
   Conceptions and types of happiness
   
   
   
   Welfare hedonistic utilitarian believe that happiness is as simple as that the absence of pain and stimulating experience of enjoyment when the non-hedonistic mental-state utilitarian think that some feelings are more valuable than sensual pleasure. Preference satisfaction utilitarian believe that each as a different weighting to different experience while the informed preference satisfaction utilitarian think that preferences are rationally formed. As a result, different types of utilitarianism exist. Act-utilitarian think that an act is judged as right by weighing according to the consequences when the rule-utilitarian believe that it is not the without delay consequences of an act that matter, rather, it is to see whether an act conforms to a rule that, if followed generally, would produce good consequences.
   
   
   
   
   
   Individuality and collectivity
   
   
   
   Despite the above, it is always still altercation that whether it is the greatest happiness of each individual or the greatest happiness of the collectivity, that is, the most essential criterion, that is, the choice between the personal preferences and the preferences of the whole society.
   
   
   
   
   
   Merits of utilitarianism
   
   
   
   Utilitarianism provides us a simple (accord with intuition) and a straightforward way of making decisions. What it needs is to estimate the cost and benefit of any decisions. Each individual is creditable as of the same value based on the equality optimism.
   
   
   
   Shortcomings of utilitarianism
   
   
   
   Despite the merits of utilitarianism, there are many shortcomings led by utilitarianism. It is doubted that happiness is countable and quantifiable. It seems impossible for happiness to be a genuine ubiquitous standard with taking no notice of special moral relationship, for example, it cannot be told that giving back things to the friend you have borrowed before practicable or not. We also do not know that the values between different people really can be compared or not.
   
   
   
   The simple utilitarianism cannot eliminate bastardies preferences, such as racial idiosyncrasy. Utilitarianism cannot provide a satisfactory account, that is, justice. We cannot know which allotment decoration is better if utilitarianism tends to think that they are equally right. Utilitarianism would even give repentance to a social system that prescribe individuals as equipment in attaining goals that are said to be for the superlative benefit of fractionate whole. Argument for non-sensual happiness as utility is running the risk of being tautological. It is really a problem in maximizing the greatest degree of happiness in the precondition of equality and to benefit of the whole society in the expenses of the individual.
   
   
   
   
   
   Conclusions
   
   
   
   All in all, utilitarianism provides us a fresh way in making decision in a more fair way towards ourselves and other people. However, the most serious weakness of the ideology is that it tries to overstate human happiness in the expenses of morality. It is impossible because we cannot live in a situation that there are no moral values. Our ordinary living environmental elements, that is, liberty, equality, justice, love and democracy, all are oriented from morality based on the word of God in the Western world, that is, the Bible. Improvement of the ideology will exist if there is a better linkage between the ideology and the human morality.
   
   
   
   
   
   References
   
   Kymlicka, W., Contemporary Political Philosophy. An Introduction.
   
   Graham, G~, Contemporary Social Philosophy.
   
   Law Wing-sun, SSP Handout 1.
   
   James A. Rice, Elements of a Free Society, Chapter 4.