If I say he has the right to eat meat because he can only survive on it, I'm appealing to the "Intrinsic Rights" school of morality which is incompatible with utilitarianism.
Most utilitarian ethicists believe that we have to vegan as it benefits other animals more than eating meat benefits us. — amirography
Please only analyze with utilitarianism in mind. — amirography
Consequentialism = whether an act is morally right depends only on consequences (as opposed to the circumstances or the intrinsic nature of the act or anything that happens before the act).
Actual Consequentialism = whether an act is morally right depends only on the actual consequences (as opposed to foreseen, foreseeable, intended, or likely consequences).
Direct Consequentialism = whether an act is morally right depends only on the consequences of that act itself (as opposed to the consequences of the agent's motive, of a rule or practice that covers other acts of the same kind, and so on).
Evaluative Consequentialism = moral rightness depends only on the value of the consequences (as opposed to non-evaluative features of the consequences).
Hedonism = the value of the consequences depends only on the pleasures and pains in the consequences (as opposed to other supposed goods, such as freedom, knowledge, life, and so on).
Maximizing Consequentialism = moral rightness depends only on which consequences are best (as opposed to merely satisfactory or an improvement over the status quo).
Aggregative Consequentialism = which consequences are best is some function of the values of parts of those consequences (as opposed to rankings of whole worlds or sets of consequences).
Total Consequentialism = moral rightness depends only on the total net good in the consequences (as opposed to the average net good per person).
Universal Consequentialism = moral rightness depends on the consequences for all people or sentient beings (as opposed to only the individual agent, members of the individual's society, present people, or any other limited group).
Equal Consideration = in determining moral rightness, benefits to one person matter just as much as similar benefits to any other person (= all who count count equally).
Agent-neutrality = whether some consequences are better than others does not depend on whether the consequences are evaluated from the perspective of the agent (as opposed to an observer).
also by Bentham:Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that states that the best action is the one that maximizes utility. — wikipedia
But I can imagine a version of utilitarianism that may say: "Do what cause more pleasure than pain." But that kind of principle has the obvious problem of being useless in cases where you have to decide between a bad choice and a worse choice; something that is a deal breaker for most utilitarians I've met (not many, it turns out).The said truth is that it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong.' — Jeremy bentham
Bentham:
The said truth is that it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong — amirography
as non other than humans have achieved such levels of abstraction. It's not dehumanizing — amirography
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.