In most countries in the world, it is easy to notice that the minority groups inhabit most of the locations of dumpsites or sewage systems. The fact that the minority group such as the people of color have been suffering as a result of discriminative environmental policies resulted to the formation of an environmental justice movement that came to life in the year 1980s in the United States. Since then, there have been different issues concerning the matter of environmental equity and racism as people are enlightened to understand that some environmental policies and acts are discriminative against the minority ( Gonzalez, 2016). By definition, environmental justice is more of a fair distribution of environmental benefits. It addresses issues such as environmental racism which focus on environmental practices and matters that are discriminative to the minority group. The main question, in this case, is whether issues such as environmental racism and discrimination are ethical. In this article, the focus is on environmental justice and racism, and how people view it under the lens of the ethical theory of Utilitarianism. The standpoint is that based on the ethical theory of Utilitarianism, environmental injustice such as environmental racism is unethical to act in society.
Utilitarianism and Its Application in the Current World
Utilitarianism is an ethical principle that individuals coined many years ago. The basis of the Utilitarianism is morality based on the outcome of an action. It focuses on the wrong and right based on what the action brings about as an output of the input. From this theory’s viewpoint, an act that people do for society must result in the benefit or the happiness of the majority of the people for it to qualify as an upright moral action. In this sense, if a person acts in a manner that is impressive for the more significant part of the society, that person is morally upright despite the path the person has followed to achieve the goal. The Utilitarianism morality perspective is the only moral framework that can be used to justify military force or war. For instance, if Attacking a country that is considered a threat will bring peace and joy to the rest of the world, the Utilitarian theory justifies that the citizens of such a country worth dying for the sake of the global peace. It is also the most common approach to moral reasoning used in business because of how it accounts for costs and benefits. For instance, it would be unethical for a seller to hike prices to get more profit while discriminating the buyers. The sellers must thus set amount that brings happiness to most people in the society ( Fryer, 2016).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Utilitarianism ethical theory thus addresses the morality of people's action in the world. It is a theory that people use to decide every day's life. It acts as a beam balance that measures the input and the output of action based on what it brings out to society. If the result seems toxic to the people, such a result is immoral despite the nature of the approach used to achieve the result. On the other side, an act must be termed right or morally upright in society despite the bad procedure that is used to achieve its outcome. It is one of the principles that people adopt in the football field. Despite the approach on the pitch, the result matters most in a football match.
Utilitarianism and complex societal issues
Utilitarianism can help in solving or making a decision regarding complex issues that society face in daily life. For instance, there is an Act-Utilitarianism and Rule-Utilitarianism that are critical in addressing societal problems and making a decision on matters such as policy formulation. For example, the Act-utilitarian is applicable on both sides of concern for an ethically-oriented choice. In this case, the right act is based on the best alternative that brings about the best result for the majority ( Bell, Dyck & Neubert, 2017). For instance, if there is a country that individuals regard a threat to the global peace and the option to restore peace and security is to attack the country, the act will be based on whether the life of the citizens in that country is critical than the peace of the entire world. The decision, in this case, will be based on the activities that will be more beneficial for the majority of the people.
There is also rule-utilitarianism. In this case, the principle of utility is the one that decides on the best rule of conduct. For instance, if a person makes and breaks a promise, then there are two ways it can be viewed under this theory to make an ethical or moral decision. The first one is the world where people break such promises, and the second one is where people keep them. If by breaking the promise, the person saves the life many people, he or she is considered moral than a person who stands true to the pledge while endangering the life of others. In all this sense, it is evident that this theory breaks down a complex issue to make it easy to make a decision.
Utilitarianism and Environmental Justice
From the Utilitarianism aspect of the environmental justices, environmental discrimination, and environmental injustices such as racism is immoral in society. Environmental injustices are situations where there is no equitable distribution of the environmental resource to people based on some of the differences they possess, such as culture and color. The environmental discrimination such as inequity and the environment racism center on a socially-dominant group's belief in its superiority, often resulting in privilege for the dominant group and the mistreatment of non-dominant minorities. In this sense, environmental discrimination is considered immorally based on the ethical principle of Utilitarianism because the outcome usually is toxic to the population that is of the target.
The environmental practices and policies which are considered just or right in the society must bring about fairness according to the utilitarianism view of ethics and morality. These are environments act that enhances respect and justice not to specific people, but tap all people in a non-bias manner. Further, these are environmental acts and policies “mandates the right to ethical, balanced and responsible uses of land and renewable resources in the interest of a sustainable planet for humans and other living things.” They further call for universal of the protection of the environment at any points against discriminative and dangerous acts such as nuclear testing, over-extraction of natural resources and also waste disposal and disposal of toxic chemicals. The ethical theory if Utilitarianism also views other environmental activities that are productive to all country, such as the equal distribution of land as moral and right because of their output results to the happiness of every person involved. Further Utilitarianism demands that when people make decisions concerning any environmental factors, the result need to be considerate to all people so that it brings benefits and joy to all people in the world without discriminating any individual due to color or culture.
Ethical Question
How can a person understand or determine whether a government project is ethical or unethical in society?
An ethical argument on the question
There is a situation where people tend to be on the crossroad environmental matters in different countries in the world. For instance, there are many cases where individuals build different companies that produce toxic chemicals on land or an ear where the majority the inhibitors are people of specific incapables that make them vulnerable. In such cases, the government claim that the factory or industry developed in that areas will either displace the inhabitants of that area or put them in danger. In such cases, people do tend to understand both the benefits of such a company and the risk it places on the people. Utilitarianism can help out in arguing such a case so that a beneficial solution is found based on morality and ethics in society. In such a case, the Utilitarianism will consider the outcome of such construction. In this case, it will be two ( Burton et al., 2017). The first outcome will be with regards to the profit the company will bring to the people around that place and the rest of the country. In case the company brings put more benefits than the risk, for instance, increase employment and economic stability, then such an action would be considered ethical to society.
Regarding the case, the Utilitarianism postulates that the outcome from the construction of setting-up that factory will increase the well-being of such individuals. Another consequence can be toxic to people, such as an increased rate of contamination to the environment. It can be a result of air pollution and water pollution. Also, it can create a situation where some people must be displaced to create a room for the factory. It can also create a situation where many people contract the different disease as a result of the high level of toxicity that exists in such an area. In this case, that decision is considered unethical and immoral from Utilitarianism ( Fok et al., 2016).
In conclusion, the Utilitarianism claims that an act that is discriminative such as environmental injustice and racism brings happiness to only a handful of people and thus are immoral. From this theory, an act that is good for society need to bring joy and benefit to the majority.
References
Bell, G. G., Dyck, B., &Neubert, M. J., (2017). Ethical Leadership, Virtue Theory, And Generic Strategies. Radical Thoughts on Ethical Leadership , 113 .
Burton, E., Goldsmith, J., Koenig, S., Kuipers, B., Mattei, N., & Walsh, T. (2017).Ethical considerations in artificial intelligence courses. AI Magazine , 38 (2), 22-34.
Fok, L. Y., Payne, D. M., & Corey, C. M. (2016). Cultural values, utilitarian orientation, and ethical decision making: A comparison of US and Puerto Rican professionals. Journal of Business Ethics , 134 (2), 263-279.
Fryer, M., (2016).A role for ethics theory in speculative business ethics teaching. Journal of business ethics , 138 (1), 79-90.
Gonzalez, C. G., (2016). Environmental Racism, American Exceptionalism, and Cold War Human Rights. Transnat'l L. & Contemp. Probs. , 26 , 281.
