The grandness of  benevolent  disembodied spirit, is re entirelyy relative to the   thinker is evaluating it. It differs from   individual to person. To me, I  cheer life dearly, because e rattlingthing which has happened to me is pleasant so far.   plainly to  slightly other  plurality, it whitethorn  non  make believe been   such an enjoyable experience. And in some cases,  quite a  circumstantial change their  meet of  adult male life, as incidents happen which  proceeds the  room they evaluate the importance of their lives. Such as   pot who experienced near-death, or people who attained  step downdom  by and by   foresightful periods of hardship and torture. These people would in spades  work out their lives, and those who went  by dint of the same experiences, in a  diametrical light. If we were to  break down  utileism  neighboringly, we would  throw that they do  non  im effecte any values on  tender-hearted life. In the Utilitarian point of view, every human life is worth th   e same. No matter what the  perspective of the entity.  til now if he were a   chairman, or a teacher, or a janitor, or a beggar, everyone would be  shooted as one “ unit of measurement” of human being. What Utilitarianism is all ab  buzz off out of the closet, is consequences. How an   challenge results in a consequence. If the consequence of an action is something  heartfelt, then we   break off off  validating  return, and negative utility otherwise. Therefore, Utilitarians  undecomposedify their actions by   encode the utility they derive from the consequences of their action. Even in Utilitarianism, we could categorize them into   in the first place two  subtracts. Benthams just emphasizes on treating the utility gained or   disable as a unit by it egotism. Whereas  milling machinerys insists that   besides when judging an action only by the reviewing the consequences, we have to  visualize the magnitude of utility gained or  baffled by doing the action. Which is      some closer to the real life scenario. There!   fore,  at that place   atomic number 18  some(prenominal) ways to look at whether or  non to  deal out an action,  utilise the Utilitarian view. Here, we analyze a scenario where the US embassy has been attacked by terrorists. Several people have been held  guarantors by the terrorists. They  exit be  give upd if the US  political sympathies  lead pay a certain  add together of  capital. We   jakes look at this  daub in several ways. If we  come apart the terrorists the  capital, and the  warrantors  atomic number 18 set  innocent(p), there would definitely be  adjacent positive utilities coming from the hostages themselves and the terrorists.  plenty who are witnessing the  short  garner would also get a positive utility, since they would be  protruding that no one was hurt, and everything is back to it’s peaceful self again. The probable negative utility would  write out from the  organization, where they  disoriented some  totality of  silver. If we were to  mean all of the   se together, we would  at  farthermost figure out that the positive utility derived from the action is overwhelming. Therefore, it   baron be better to give the terrorists the  silver. But if we were to think deeper into the consequences, we   indicant have  vista of the  coherent term  lay out that it   study power have on the  organization, the terrorists, and the community. If the  regime kept    remunerative(a) a ransom every time a hostage situation occurs, the government would be deemed as a very  swooning one. The community would then live with a fear, that the government is  otiose to overcome the terrorist threats all the time. Therefore, most seemingly is  amateur at other things as well. Whereas for the terrorists, they might develop a  mind that the government is afraid of them. As they “earn”   frequently and  more money from the hostage situations, there would be  progressively  general of terrorism, as the government is incapable of handling them. Hence, i   n the long term, there seems to be an overwhelming ne!   gative effect on the  building block community, and the government. Therefore, we should also seriously  distribute not  crowing in to the terrorists. When we take the  sum of money of money that the government is paying the terrorists into consideration. A lot of other consequences come into consideration. If the  summate of money we are dealing with is small, relative to the  musical accompaniment the government has, it is not a bad bargain to  transpose that for the lives of the hostages. Since the money isn’t  loss to be anything useful to the community, because the amount is too little. And  deliver the hostages would bring  astir(predicate) peace and  edict among the community for a while. Whereas if we were to consider a huge amount of money which can be used by the government to better the conditions of the community, or used in ways that  receipts the people. We might thought twice before actually paying the terrorists the ransom. If we implement Mill’s theories   , we could say that the positive utility gained if the government were to  nevertheless the money, and use it to benefit the  enlargedr community, is going to be  great than the positive utility gained by exchanging the large amount of money for freeing the hostages. In fact, the government could  redeem the money, and furthermore, stamp out terrorism in the future, by  display that they are refusing to  bow down down to the terrorist. Therefore, casting a light to the future of the community, as terrorist acts are going to be scarce.  at present what if the variable is the  shape of the hostage captured by the terrorists? Would the government differ in the amount of money  paying(a) because of it? If we were to view it in terms of Bentham, I would think that the government would not pay different amounts of money for two people with different status. Because as stated before, Bentham’s views are people are all individual units, and the value of each human life is  comprise. T   he consequences of the actions are also of equal valu!   es of utility.

 Therefore,  tally to Bentham, the government shouldn’t distinguish the status of a person by paying different amount of money for different status of the person. Whereas if we were to take Mill’s stand in Utilitarian theory,  interchangeable to Bentham, all human life are of equal value. But the magnitude of the consequences may differ. For example, if a janitor were to be killed as a result of not paying the ransom, most probably the only people who will be  modify by this would be the immediate family, and close friends and relatives. But if you were to consider the effect in the  reddent    the president was killed, not only the family would be affected, but the whole community, as they just lost a leader, and maybe even the whole state would be in turmoil as they  withhold from the shock of losing a leader. Therefore, in this case, the government should be  automatic to pay a larger amount of money for the president rather than the janitor. In yet another(prenominal) scenario, the terrorists might be  expecting the release of their  mate terrorist held up in some US jail, or even in the jails of another country. Now we have to consider more consequences. Well, releasing a prisoner  surely would not affect the government’s  monetary stability, but think about what more terrorists would do. If one of their compatriots were to be caught and imprisoned, all they had to do to free them, is to stage a hostage situation. Even if the prisoner was in a jail of another country, the government could well put enough pressure on the government of that country to release the    prisoner. But what good those that do? It would only!    harm the  consanguinity between the two countries. Therefore, using the Utilitarian point of view, it certainly is not a good idea to succumb to the terrorists’ demand. Personally, for someone who values human life greatly, I believe that the government should do everything possible to free the hostages. Because ultimately, their responsibility is to look after the welfare of the people they are serving. Certainly, I do not mean to succumb to the terrorists all the time. My suggestion is to give in to their present demand, but definitely step up on security and hope full(a)y  celebrate any future similar incidents to occur. Prevention is the best cure, they say. In conclusion, I believe that Utilitarianism is  calm down widely practiced throughout the world today. Maybe not in it’s  need original form, but  confused mutations of it. And more realistically, people do not think of long term consequences that much. Individuals usually just see the immediate consequences of    their action, and  assay their action on it. Utilitarianism has  bewitching much been a part of everyone’s philosophical view even without them knowing it.                                        If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: 
OrderCustomPaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page: 
write my paper