The theory of utilitarianism has a right side that may be contradicting to the learners. This assignment aim at showing how the use of mind-altering substances is supported and not supported by the ethical theory of utilitarianism, and helps me in developing a moral conclusion. Medical marijuana has been used in the past as a pain reliever and an antidepressant to help people suffering from chronic pain, depression, anxiety, and so forth, achieving happiness for the patients. However, if you consider the use of alcohol and its consequences of drinking and driving does not support the theory because the outcome not to reach the happiness of the entire society.
Utilitarianism theory is characterized by happiness and consequentialism. According to Hortense (2012) , satisfaction is what everyone is looking for, and therefore, everything useful to happiness is good. The main principle of the theory is utility. The utility is anything that contributes to the satisfaction of a rational being. The characteristic of consequentialism indicates that an action can be judged from its results on the happiness of the broader community.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
While happiness is the goal of the theory, different methods are where major philosophers disagree on how to attain it as indicated by various social institutions such as molarity and law. Aristotle also noted that although there is a comprehensive agreement that happiness is the goal, there exist disagreements on what constitutes happiness ( Hortense, 2012) . Therefore the theory is focused on the outcome on the broader population rather than the process of attaining the result. The moral of the method is based on the happiness of the larger society than the satisfaction of a single individual.
The use of mind-changing drugs has long been known as harmful for human consumption. Mind changing substances such as opium, marijuana, alcohol, cocaine, and so forth have been held illegal for use by population in different parts of the world. The reason is that the utility attained from the use of these substances affects the happiness of a single person and consequently, the entire society. However, these drugs have some benefits that, when used within a relatively controlled environment.
Morally it is right for the use of mind-changing substances for therapeutic or medical purposes in a relatively controlled environment. The use of marijuana to relieve pain and other medical reason in a controlled situation, for example, helps bring happiness and intrinsic value to the patient. In the medical field, research has shown that marijuana can be manipulated to acquire value meaning that it can be used by patients who are in chronic pain or are under depression. Caregivers opt for such measures because some of these drugs are effects compared to other forms of painkiller or antidepressant medications.
The focus here is on the right outcome ( Mill, 2009) . When marijuana is used for chronic pain or depression purposes, it helps the patient get better. The use of these mind-changing substances is based on the outcome. Utilitarianism focusses on the final outcome without considering the process applied to reach the results. However, the results must benefit the broader community rather than one individual. Physicians use the mind-changing substances to help patients suffering from different conditions.
On the other hand, people who use the mind-changing materials for recreational purposes end up enjoying themselves alone. The consequences of using such drugs for recreational reasons include deteriorating health, accidents, conflicts, and so forth. When used for recreational purposes, the drugs harm the user the effects trickle down to the family, friends, community, company, and society.
Caregivers have an ethical and moral responsibility to help the patient acquire happiness by providing care that will help improve the state of the patient. The utility that the patients get from using such forms of drugs is getting better. However, the use of such medications can only be under a controlled situation, meaning that there is an ethical guideline that is used. However, there are questions raised on the moral perspective on the use of these substances. The substances affect the state of mind of a person, primarily when used for a long time. It raises the question of whether it is worth it to correct a wrong while using the wrong approach. The reasoning here can be compared to any other form of conventional medication or treatment. For example, an extensive injury or the leg may lead to the amputation of the leg meaning, which also harms the patient but improves the current condition. It is a similar ethical logic that is applied to the use of drugs with significant side effects on the patient.
The use of some of these drugs for recreational purposes creates happiness for the user but cause harm to the larger society. Ethically the use of these drugs for recreational reasons decreases happiness to other people in the community. The consequences of using drugs cause harm to the general welfare of other people. While a member of a family attains happiness by taking alcohol, it affects the financial security of the family. Drink driving may cause a road accident that results in detrimental injuries or death that has a fatal impact on the welfare of close people to the victim. The use of hard drugs, such as cocaine affects the health of a person and also affects the finances of that person. Addicted drug users are a burden to society since the government has to create rehabilitation centers and programs that are aimed at helping these individuals. Ethically it is wrong to use these drugs for recreational reasons because the happiness of the user decreases the satisfaction of the society. Consequentially, the use of the drug may result in the harm of the user. The utility gained from drug use hurts the user.
The moral principles guiding the two situations explained using the utilitarianism theory are the same, but the application is different. Happiness is paramount according to various scholars who were part of the utilitarianism theory ( Mill, 2009) . Happiness is created when there is the value that a person gets from a particular utility. However, the cost should not only address the satisfaction of a single person but to the broader population. The utilitarianism theory is based on the morality of promoting the good of society.
Therefore the according to the theory, the moral principle is only ideal only if the conformity of the universe would maximize the welfare of the society ( Driver, 2014) . In our case, the use of harmful drugs under controlled environment for therapeutic or medical purposes is for the welfare of the broader community. When a person is sick, anxious, or depressed, it affects the well-being of the people who are strictly related to the patient. By using marijuana or any other form of the drug that, in a different circumstance, remain harmful to treat such patients is for the good of the patient and the entire society in general.
The final results or outcomes of the treatment are to eliminate the underlying medical problem. The utility that the patient acquires is the value that is in the mind-changing substances that help them get better. The efficiency that society gets from the use of mind-changing materials for medical reasons is the elimination of the fear of the deteriorating condition of the patient.
When people use these drugs for recreational purposes, it is for personal good. However, the outcome of using drugs is harmful to the right of the broader population. While the concept would be to acquire pleasure from the use of the mind-changing substances, it affects the health, judgment, finances, and so forth of the patient. For example, people use alcohol for pleasure and a good feeling. However, if a, there is a probability of an accident that affects the entire a large number of people. While the moral principle is to utilitarianism is for the good of one and the community is large, the use of these drugs for recreational purposes affects the welfare of the city.
From an ethical perspective, the use of mind-changing substances to improve the well-fare of a patient is good for the larger society. From the above discussion, one can conclude that the use of mind-changing materials for therapeutic or medicinal purposes is ethical in a controlled environment. The use of similar substances for recreational purposes may be detrimental to the welfare of the larger society, and thus it is unethical.
The intention and consequences of using mind-changing substances for medical or therapeutical reasons are good. The doctor aim at using mind-changing materials to help improve the current situation of the parent. The doctors must have a reason why the use of the content is beneficial to the patient and the larger society.
According to Sidgwick, utilitarianism is the basic theory that explains the moral reasoning. The moral rationale must go beyond intuition, meaning that there must be a process that is intended to reach the better good of society ( Driver, 2014) . The decision-maker must focus on the outcome of the process rather than the process. In this case, the use of mind-changing substances to attain better health for the patient is ethical and morally right when done in a controlled situation.
The theory of utilitarianism focuses on the outcomes of what is right without concentrating on the process that is followed to attain those results. The argument falls under consequentialism, meaning that it is a theory that focusses on the consequences of an action. Therefore the theory holds that the most ethical choice is the one that gives the best outcome for the more significant number. Based on our situation, the use of mind-changing substances like marijuana to treat depression or chronic pain is beneficial to a more substantial amount. Based on the side effects of the materials, it would be unethical to use such materials on the patients, but the focus here is on the outcome. The outcome is that the patients who will handle these forms of medication or therapy will be relieved of the condition, which is the most important, according to utilitarianism philosophers.
References
The driver, J. (2014). The history of utilitarianism. Retrieved June 27, 2019, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/utilitarianism-history/
Hortense, G. (n.d.) (2012). Utilitarian philosophy. Retrieved June 27, 2019, from http://utilitarianphilosophy.com/jeremybentham.eng.html
Mill, J. S. (2009). Utilitarianism . Retrieved June 27, 2019, from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/apus/reader.action?docID=435879&query=
