Activity 1: The COVID-19 Pandemic Problem
LOCALLY STRANDED INDIVIDUALS
LSI- The Locally Stranded Individuals. Is it ethically justified if we refused to accept
them for, they might bring danger to our place?
Choose one among the moral issues given then write a short essay about it following
this question. If Bentham and Mill would decide, how would they confront these moral
dilemmas? Are there any similarities in their ideas? Point the differences.
Jeremy Bentham is a philosopher who abide by the principle of the act of
utilitarianism. To him, an action is right if and only if it produces the greatest balance of
pleasure over pain for the greatest number. Given his moral principle, it can be easily said
that the moral dilemma in the situation of locally stranded individuals has an absolute
solution that would solve the issue thoroughly. If Bentham would decide; those few people
(locally stranded individuals) who can risk the state and health of the greater number of
the unaffected ones, should just stay where they are rather than go to places where they
could possibly pass on the virus to another which will inevitably spread between people
therefore risking everyone’s health. Unless sure and positive results of examination were
conducted to those locally stranded individuals, no one should be carelessly brought
anywhere and this decision to Bentham is ethically justifiable. Mill will probably arrive at
the same conclusion weighing rules that will generally benefit the majority and which
consequences provide the greatest pleasure for the greatest number. It is a general rule
that one must not obstruct someone from going to his/her family for he/she has the right
for it especially during the pandemic, family should stick together because it is the time
where each one should be present to one another. However, there is also a rule that
unless someone has quarantined for fourteen days and confirmed that he/she really has
no trace of the Covid-19 virus in his/her system then that is the time where she can finally
able to go home or go anywhere to his/her likings. The latter rule benefits the majority
and should therefore be followed and it is still ethically justifiable if we follow Mill’s line of
principle.
There are indeed similarities between the decision of Bentham and Mill for at the
end of the day, they believe in the same concept and rules: utilitarianism and
consequentialism. The similarities are that they both ignored what might be the current
emotions, situations, and mental state the locally stranded individual might have in their
circumstances fighting battles alone; whether they misses their family and is longing to
come back home, or whether they are mentally obstructed and needed emotional support
from their loved ones, or either they have pressing matters to attend and go to such as
the real-life situation of a father who is quarantined after having in contact with his
deceased wife who have died due to the virus. He has to aid his wife for no one would do
that except him. Left in their home is his three young children who also need the fatherly
care he should be providing. In that situation, Bentham and Mill will sacrifice the father for
the risk that he might be carrying the virus and is risking the life of his three more children
and even the life of those people that surrounds them. The difference between their
decision might be that Bentham’s focuses on the action while Mill’s focuses on the rule.
Nonetheless, there are little to no differences as to what perception, principle, and
decision they both stand.