Bhavik Rajyaguru

HUM 110

Prof. HAN

Utilitarianism in Modern Society

Utilitarianism is evident in many different facets of society today. According to the

Utilitarianism theory, actions can be considered right or wrong based on the pleasure derived

from said action. Also to consider is which action not only provides the greatest amount of

pleasure, but also the least amount of pain. A person who is a utilitarian would choose the action

that maximizes the amount of happiness for the people around him, as well as himself. A good

example of the Utilitarianism theory is shown on the old television show known as Frasier. In

one episode of the show different examples of the Utilitarianism theory are given to viewers in

the form of short segments.

To begin, the first example of the Utilitarianism theory is given to viewers shortly after

the episode begins. Niles and Frasier wish to take their father to a nice restaurant for dinner in

order to introduce him to a finer dining experience. This scene does an excellent job in

highlighting a few different aspects of Utilitarian ethics. According to John Mill, “ it is an

unquestionable fact that those who are equally acquainted with and equally capable of

appreciating and enjoying both do give a most marked preference to the manner of existence

which employ their higher faculties. This relates to the scene of the show in which Frasier and

Niles discuss their fathers alligator suit and find it to be distasteful. The brothers believe that

because of their greater intelligence and quality of living, they have much more refined taste in

comparison to their father who was unable to be as successful as the two sons. This is
compounded upon by the pair inviting their father to a critically acclaimed restaurant which

normal people would normally have to wait months to be able to even get a table there.

A second aspect of the Utilitarianism theory is shown in the behavior Frasier displays

during the entirety of the episode. Frasier is a famous radio host, and before he goes on the show

he has his assistant say that they have the best radio show in Seattle. While this goes to show that

Frasier seeks fame for the happiness inherent in fame itself, he also seeks it for the means that

fame can provide. Frasier is of the belief that due to the fame and renown he has gained through

his radio show, He will be given guaranteed seating at the restaurant. According to the textbook

reading, “both of power and fame, is the immense aid they gave to the attainment of our other

wishes.” Fame is simply a means to an end for Frasier. Another example of this idea of a “means

to an end” is given in the scene where frasier and niles agree to join their father for dinner at a

cheaper restaurant instead of their original choice. The expensive restaurant served as an

example to show that Frasier and Niles are beings of higher faculties, but also the restaurant was

a means to an end. The end being a nice dinner shared between two sons and their father who

was eager to spend time with them regardless of where they spent it. While originally not being

open to the idea of the cheaper restaurant, both brothers decide to go in order to still enjoy time

with their father. The restaurant choice itself was simply the means to acquiring this time.

A third example of utilitarian ethics is given in the actual dinner scene prior to their father

leaving. The father has an argument with his sons that actually show 3 different aspects of the

Utilitarianism theory. The father brings up that even though he did not wish to go to fancier

restaurant that his sons chose, he was still willing to go and enjoy a meal without making a fuss

with the two of them. The father was being a utilitarian in that regard of choosing the action that
brought about the greatest amount of pleasure for which the good of the world is made up.

According to the textbook, “the multiplication of happiness is according to the utilitarian ethics,

the object of virtue.” Frasier and Niles father also goes on to say that he believed his sons were

similar to their mother and simply enjoyed ballet and other such activities. He goes on to

acknowledge that she had finer tastes. This goes to show that he also believes that Niles and

Frasier are of higher faculties and because of this they appreciate things that he simply does not.

The father ends the argument after stating that “even though your mother had fancy tastes, she

had way too much class to ever make me or somebody else ever feel second rate, if she saw the

way you two behaved tonight she would be disappointed.” Both Niles and Frasier are then left to

contemplate these words. This leads to them coming to the conclusion that they had acted like

snobs up to that point and had no right to be so disrespectful to the wait staff as well as their

father. According to the textbook, “love of money, power, or of fame ―that all of these, and

often do, render the individual noxious to other members of the society to which he belongs,

whereas there is nothing that makes him so much of a blessing to them as the cultivation of

disinterested love for virtue. While the father explained that the mother of the two boys had

“class”, in truth she was actually just being virtuous. She was willing to enjoy the simpler

pleasures even though she had higher faculties in order to make her husband and others of lower

faculties happier as well. Both Frasier and Niles had become jaded in their views due to their

inherent lack of virtue, and the fact that they would seek virtue as a means to happiness rather

than for virtue in itself.

After realizing the error of their ways the two brothers attempt to prove that they are not

snobs and are like their mother. They attempt to do so by finishing the meals placed in front of
them even though they find the food appalling. John Mill states, “ It may be doubted that the

noble character is always the happier for its nobleness, there can be no doubt that it makes other

people happier, and that the world in general is immensely gainer by it.” The two brothers

attempt to gain back some of the nobleness to their character by attempting to follow in the

footsteps of their mother.

Finally, I do not find myself agreeing with the actions of the two brothers at the end of

the episode. I believe that the damage had already been done at that point in regards to their

character. The wait staff and the father knew that the two brothers were not enjoying the meals

and were only partaking forcefully. If the two brothers had kept their rude jokes to themselves

the entire argument with their father could have been avoided. The two brothers did make some

utilitarian choices throughout the episode, But I feel that the father was actually the greatest

utilitarian out of the bunch. He was willing to accept that his wife and children had a finer taste

than him, and attempted to make the choices that brought the most pleasure for them. It was his

sons who failed him. Morally I disapprove of the Utilitarianism theory. I simply do not accept

that choices are made simply in order to procure happiness and reduce pain. People are

unpredictable and have to rely on guesswork in order to make a prediction of what may occur

from any said action they may do. I believe that humanity is not able to conform to this theory

because human nature simply is a volatile force that can act without reason.