NAME ; Ajagbe Hajarat Abiodun

DEPARTMENT: Dramatic Arts

MATRIC NO; DRA/2016/016

In the paper what is wrong with slavery, R.M. Hare argues that, according to utilitarianism(a moral principle that
acts on gaining or developing the use of having utility or what is known as happiness to the Greater amount of
people ) R.M HARE as a utilitarian was objective during the course of his writing he supported the abolishment
and commended it if given that circumstances can be envisaged in which utility would be would be maximized by
preserving a slave-owning society and not abolishing slavery and how it might be unhumane , because the nature
of human it self is cruel and even an ordinary person would take every opportunity to exercise excessive power on
those inferior to them

slavery is evil and should be abolished in every society because of the utility. He discusses the definition of
slavery, and after that shows imaginary cases to illustrate his ideas. However, does his argument make a cogent
case? Is there any exceptions to his argument? Can we find any conditions in which slavery may actually be
reasonable and justified to exist, and bring benefits to the society? My answer to this is yes ,During the course of
Harem’s writing he gave an imaginary example of Juba and Camica where Juba retained the institution of slavery
but makes amendments to the system by giving them improved conditions of work and increased wages while
Camaica because of demagogy freed her slaves and this led to widespread of starvation and misery to the extent
that the free men in camaica emigrated to Juba to become slaves but he later gave argument against it saying there
are other means apart from slavery. He said ,if the leaders were really amazing leaders of outstanding
statesmanship they could have done better by abolishing slavery and substituting a free but disciplined society,
HARE said that they gave the slaves some legal rights; What was to prevent them giving them right to change
residences and job.As an Utilitarian who maximises the pleasure of the Greatest amount of people he said that
there are definitely other means to have a successful economy apart from slavery he said “Did the retention of
slavery in particular contribute very much to the prosperity of Juba that could not have been achieved by other
means? In short, did not the optimum solution lie somewhere between the systems adopted in Juba and Camica,
but on the free side of the boundary between slavery and liberty?

If the amount of slaves compared to masters are not that great then abolishing it would have effect on the economy
.Happiness is complex, it is generally acknowledged that people who have their physical and emotional needs
satisfied and their human rights guaranteed are happy. But according to the discussions above, if to choose between
meeting the basic needs and human rights, which one will make people happier? Or, based on the example above, a
slave with abundant things to eat and a comfort bed to sleep, compared with a hobo with nothing to eat and
nowhere to sleep, but has the freedom to do whatever he/she wants, who is happier? Probably slavery is a process
of self-realization, which helps slaves find their personal value through their hard work. When making the
evaluation of happineses, some people put more weight to human rights, while others make basic needs as their
priority. Satisfying basic needs comes first then according to utilitarianism principle slavery is justified

Following the consquentialist principle of ethics, the abolishment of slavery should be based on the outcome of
slavery. If slavery is abolished it may lead to more desperate state of being with little or nothing to eat and nowhere
to sleep ,giving thus should rights be consider over basic needs for survival. The Argument of R.M HARE is
examined and exceptions in which utilitarianism actually condones slavery are proposed and analyzed ,Slavery
may mean misery for slaves but the abolishment may lead the slaves to desperate state of living with difficulties to
cater for themselves .