The main rule of utilitarianism is to perform the one action that will provide the greatest amount of pleasure and the least amount of pain to the greatest number of people. In our case study, one would think the choice is quite easy, if we let go of Gary, we are providing no happiness for anyone and a great deal of pain to his family and friends and to ourselves. However, the one person that will get pleasure from this scenario is perhaps Gary, who is suffering. According to the utilitarian theory, the right action to perform would be to do everything in our power to save Gary, because if we save him there would be a lot more people that will be happy then if we were to let him die. There is only one person who would get pleasure from letting Gary go, and that is Gary himself. One could argue that the person watching Gary suffer will provide that person with a great amount of pain, but if we were to let Gary go, as painful as it may be to watch our friend die and be the one responsible, we may find ourselves happy that he did not suffer. The Greatest Happiness Principle suggest that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to promote the reverse of happiness. In our case study, saving Gary would promote happiness to ourselves and friends and family of Gary, letting Gary succumb to his injuries and letting go will promote the reverse of happiness to ourselves and friends and family of Gary. According to Mill, pleasures are qualitatively different, depending on their origin, meaning some pleasures should be counted more heavily. Does the pleasure we will receive in saving Gary and watching him live outweigh the pleasure Gary might receive by not suffering and dying a quick death. According to…
