Jeremy Bentham was named the founder of utilitarianism, a concept in which the value of an action is a consequence of its consequences. In essence, people make decisions about their actions based on the intended consequences of the action; which will lead to happiness and satisfaction of the greatest number of people.
History tells us that Winston Churchill envisioned the beating of the bombing of the British city of Coventry on November 14, 1940. However, despite the fact that he was given at least 48 hours notice that the city was to be the object of a German air raid, Churchill did not warn the residents of the area. Although many legal, political, and moral dilemmas emerge from such a decision, Churchill was undoubtedly faced with what should have been a terrible decision; donate the people and the city of Coventry or inform the Germans that the British code violators have deciphered important means of German military communication.
The violation of the code was probably a major military triumph for the British, and Churchill, of course, would not like to sacrifice his newfound knowledge to the Germans. Therefore, Churchill would have to choose the lesser of evil and allow Coventry people to attack themselves, as in previous bombardments. Of course, the utilitarianism of Jeremy Bentham would have sacrificed moral and political value, since the fate of millions of people across the world was based on Churchill’s willingness to sacrifice the city of Coventry. However, the knowledge owned by the British, did not prevent the destruction of millions of Europeans.
Undoubtedly, any decision similar to that which Churchill encountered in 1940 would be extremely unpleasant, and many people would not be able to make such a decision. However, if the sacrifice of hundreds or thousands of people saves millions or even billions, a decision must be made. There can be no case where the decision can be determined morally wrong without a victim, will not give similar results; In fact, using Coventry as an example if the victim of the city was only to protect the knowledge of the code, and this knowledge would not save millions. Simple code protection would not be enough to rationalize such a solution, but there will be protection for millions of people.
Bentham application hedonistic calculus to this example give interesting results. pleasure that the result of Churchill’s decision in this case should have been the code factor for ending the war and saving millions of lives, although, of course, there was no actual pleasure in this situation. Such an equation would be weak, since the results of the solution would be in the near future, if it happens at all. Churchill took a calculated risk to donate to Coventry, which could easily be wrapped. However, comparisons and theories cannot be used to approach morality, since morality is a self-defined and emotional concept.
