No, lying out of fear is not compulsive lying. Compulsive lying is an actual disorder, characterized by the pathalogical liar telling fibs without motivation, often telling wildly exaggerated stories and appearing to honestly believe them to be true.
Unlike the libertarian case for open bordersthis case relies more heavily on an empirical evaluation of migration policy. People may agree with the underlying moral premises but not the utilitarian case, because of disputes about the consequences of open borders.
As with all our top-level pages, please treat this page only as a starting point in exploring the ethics of the open borders question. To dig deeper, follow and read the links. TL;DR Utilitarianism is the general idea that our goal should be to maximize total utility. It is related to the idea of cost-benefit analysis.
Utilitarian justifications for open borders hinge on the idea that an open borders policy is better for human welfare than the status quo. Despite the huge error bars, it seems relatively clear that the upside, and the median gain estimate, for open borders exceeds that from other similar policies such as liberalization of trade and capital flows.
The income gains from open borders are likely to be disproportionately realized by currently poor people.
In fact, open borders will likely speed up the end of world poverty. The main source of skepticism about open borders from the universalist utilitarian perspective is that open borders would kill the goose that lays the golden eggsby significantly reducing the productive and innovative capacity of the best political, social, and economic systems around the world.
You might also be interested in Felicifiaa forum devoted to discussion of utilitarianism. Image to describe cost-benefit analysis and utilitarian thinking, source Felicifia post by Gee Joe Why should the utilitarian case matter to non-utilitarians?
Few people are willing to embrace utilitarianism wholesale. Further, interesting paradoxes aside, in many cases, the morality of an action is partly determined by its consequences. This idea is utilitarian. In the case of open borders, the utilitarian case for it is overwhelmingly strong. Combining with the fact that there is a strong libertarian and a strong egalitarian case for open borders, the overall argument becomes quite strong.
The utilitarian case has two chief strengths: It gives a much better quantitative sense of the importance of the open borders issue. It is the aspect of the moral case that most directly connects empirical claims about the effects of migration with moral assertions about migration policy.
It is most grounded in real-world consequences and most sensitive to changes in beliefs about the nature of these consequences.
You can read more about the economic findings, and disputes and caveats, here. The important point worth noting is that, even if these gains are significantly overstated, the gains from open borders for global production could still be huge.
The increase in global production is most closely tied to the efficiency-based case for open borders in the sense of Pareto or Kaldor-Hicks efficiency. This is not quite a utilitarian case, because the utilitarian case would consider the differing levels of marginal utility that different people derive from money.
Some people have argued that open borders could accelerate the end of global poverty. While the pro-poor distributional impacts are of particular interest to egalitarians, they are also important to utilitarians, because money at the margin means more to poor people than to rich people.
Thus, insofar as the gains from open borders are enjoyed more by poorer people, we get even more utility gain than if it were equally distributed. Killing the goose that lays the golden eggs The main objection to open borders within the universalist framework is that the above estimation of the effect of open borders is wrong in important ways, and that open borders could seriously endanger or harm the functioning of the global economic, social, and political order.
For a detailed discussion of arguments of this sort, see our page on killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. Universalist versus parochial utilitarianism The utilitarianism described here is a universalist utilitarianism: Utilitarian arguments of this sort are referred to on this site as citizenist or territorialist arguments respectively.Immigrant Worker Ethics Essay; I will provide my opinion and consider some of the utilitarian and deontological considerations, and conclude this report with a brief summary of the entire analysis, highlighting some of the most significant parts that the report contains Ethics and Undocumented Immigrants Undocumented immigration is a.
Utilitarianism is a philosophical theory of morality and "how one should act". It states that one should act so as to maximize the amount of happiness in the world (focuses on the CONSEQUENCES.
"Utilitarian Analysis Of Immigration Would Consider" Essays and Research Papers Utilitarian Analysis Of Immigration Would Consider ETHICS INDIVIDUAL LITERATURE REVIEW: A UTILITARIAN ANALYSIS ON ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION GIULIO SOLFRIZZI ID NUMBER A UTILITARIAN ANALYSIS ON .
The principle of utilitarianism can be traced to the writings of Jeremy Bentham, who lived in England during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
Bentham, a legal reformer, sought an objective basis that would provide a publicly acceptable norm for determining what kinds of laws England should enact. immigration regimes of countries like Canada, the US, Australia/NZ and Europe, want go elsewhere to make a decent life, to provide a decent life for family left behind and more importantly, to make possible a decent life for their children and for them 5.
Utilitarian Analysis Let us first consider the consequences of changing the methods of investigation employed by SOS. Logically, SOS would not engage in further illegal activities, Dunn would not face any litigation, and her family would not face any embarrassment or financial hardship.