The basic principle here is "The greatest happiness for the greatest number."
One historical example that is often reported is that of slavery. Slaves represented a minority in America, and the work they did was vital to the economy, especially in the South. For this reason, it has been argued that the benefit their labor provided white Americans outweighed the suffering they experienced. It was not until the thinking on this reversed that abolitionism gained ground as a movement.
A more current example is that of the death penalty. The death penalty is viewed by many to be a vital part of the justice system. In the case of a death sentence, a convicted murderer's suffering is outweighed by the preservation of justice.
You can also think of Homeland Security; it has been argued for years by many that the violations of personal liberties and civil rights brought on in the name of national security are worth it to prevent acts of terrorism. If we all have our phone calls monitored and our emails read, or if a few innocent people have to be detained without due process in order to be certain they aren't terrorists, some people say it's worth it if we all are kept safe.
In short, government action sometimes violates what some consider basic human rights: the right to life (death penalty), liberty (slavery), and the pursuit of happiness (slavery as well), and the Bill of Rights (Homeland Security) in order to promote what is calculated to be "the greatest good." The suffering of a few is a perfectly ethical exchange for the happiness of the many, according to utilitarianism.
One historical example that is often reported is that of slavery. Slaves represented a minority in America, and the work they did was vital to the economy, especially in the South. For this reason, it has been argued that the benefit their labor provided white Americans outweighed the suffering they experienced. It was not until the thinking on this reversed that abolitionism gained ground as a movement.
A more current example is that of the death penalty. The death penalty is viewed by many to be a vital part of the justice system. In the case of a death sentence, a convicted murderer's suffering is outweighed by the preservation of justice.
You can also think of Homeland Security; it has been argued for years by many that the violations of personal liberties and civil rights brought on in the name of national security are worth it to prevent acts of terrorism. If we all have our phone calls monitored and our emails read, or if a few innocent people have to be detained without due process in order to be certain they aren't terrorists, some people say it's worth it if we all are kept safe.
In short, government action sometimes violates what some consider basic human rights: the right to life (death penalty), liberty (slavery), and the pursuit of happiness (slavery as well), and the Bill of Rights (Homeland Security) in order to promote what is calculated to be "the greatest good." The suffering of a few is a perfectly ethical exchange for the happiness of the many, according to utilitarianism.