Bentham and Mills

Utilitarianism says that the result or the consequence of a particular act is the real measure of whether is it positive or negative. This theory enforces emphasises on the phrase “ends over means” and is therefore, a consequentialist ethical theory. Despite this, Utilitarianism may be interpreted differently or in another form, e.g. such as “Rule utilitarianism”, which is represented by the two different interpretations of utilitarianism by two consequentialists; John Stuart Mills (Rule utilitarianism) and Jeremy Bentham (Act utilitarianism).
Mills constructed the theory of “Rule utilitarianism”, which focuses on general rules that everyone should follow to bring about the greatest good for that community. Rule utilitarianism establishes the best overall rule by determining the course of action which, when pursued by the whole community, leads to the best outcome. Rule utilitarianism argues that, in any situation, we must obey the given rule even if it does not lead to the greatest pleasure for us in that particular situation. Despite of this, Mill maintained that the well-being of the individual was of the greatest importance and that happiness is most effectively gained when individuals are free to pursue their own ends, subject to rules that protect the common good for all. To contrast this greatly, Bentham’s theory of act utilitarianism maintained that, whenever possible, the principle of utility must be directly applied for each individual situation, abolishing this idea of “general rules” which are believed to apply to everyone. This provides Act Utilitarianism a greater amount of flexibility, as it enables to take into account specific individual situations at given moments, although the actions that it justifies can change. Despite of this contrast, a similarity is present, with Bentham agreeing with Mill’s emphasis that a person’s well-being is of the utmost importance.
While Mill accepted the utility principle of “the greatest good for the greatest