Top-Rated Free Essay

Utilitarianism - Act and Rule

Good Essays
Topics: Utilitarianism
Explain the differences between Act and Rule Utilitarianism

Since it began, there have been two main exponents of Utilitarianism. They are Jeremy Bentham and J S Mill, and both of them base their own individual theories on the principle of utility, which defines something (an act, etc) dependent on if it achieves "the greatest happiness for the greatest number". This makes Utilitarianism a relativistic and consequentialist argument, as it takes into account only the outcome of events rather than the act itself as means to determine whether it is good/right. Also it holds no absolutes - it takes the best interests of the greatest number of people no matter if the way of doing seems morally wrong. Bentham and Mill were both generally harmonious in their understanding that the general happiness of a human being is linked to their personal fulfillment of pleasure. Nevertheless, the two clashed when it came down to the understanding of what true pleasure is, and whether it holds different values under different circumstances.

It was due to this that Bentham started Act Utilitarianism. Bentham thought that situations were to be treated completely differently to any and every other situation, and developed the Hedonistic Calculus as a means of measuring the pleasure and pain of those directly involved in it. The calculus consists of seven aspects which Bentham believed could answer to whether something is pleasurable/painful or not - they are Purity, Remoteness, Richness, Intensity, Certainty, Extend and Duration. It is possible for me to use an example to make this all seem clearer. There are five sadistic guards in a prison who don't like the new inmate and want to give him a roughing up. One can argue that the pain the inmate will suffer is huge (purity) but the calculus is focused on quantity rather than quality. Also, the happiness of the guards will be fulfilled due to their sadistic means of pleasurement (certainty) however, the guards might get caught and sacked which in turn makes them sad in the end, but perhaps they don't then the pleasure of the guards outweighs the pain that the inmate faces and therefore under these guidelines I think that Bentham would say "yeah, go ahead" and allow the bullying and assault to happen.

Bentham's democratic and egalitarianistic approach meant that he believed nobody's pleasures are greater than anyone elses, and that they are all equal so we can't say that they count for more. This meant that Bentham was purely focused on the quantitative side of the pleasure. It was here where Mill and Bentham came to a disagreement, as Mill however focused on the qualitative aspects of the pleasure, famously saying "it is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a pig satisfied". This meant understanding that there are differences that must be acknowledged between higher and lower pleasures. He thought that higher pleasures consisted of the intellectual aspects of humans rather than the animalistic, such as reading to further your knowledge, listening to fine music and painting art. The aforementioned animalistic pleasures (lower) derive from the physical side of life, such as eating, drinking and indulging in sexual acts.
This approach can be seen as elitist by some, which means that full excellence can only be realised by the mature males of the upper class within society - natural amongst the Ancient Greek Philosophers that preceeded Bentham and Mill, such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle.

As advocator to Rule Utilitarianism, Mill's calculation method again differentiates from Bentham's hedonistic calculus. Rather than Bentham's quantitative approach, Mill looks at it in an alternative way, observing the various implications of the act. Mill's interpretation is that there are general rules within society that should be followed as they create the greatest happiness for the greatest good for all those in society. This at first does seem very logical, but then again it begins to defy the basis on which Utilitarianism's foundations are layed down, which is a relativist and consequentialist theory. And this is where strong and weak rules comes into the frame. Mill never onces says "must" as regards to the rules he would involve as he perceives his judgment upon whether something is good or bad or what should occur within a specific situation, which can be seen as his defence to remaining relativist, however a new term must be enforced to separate his understanding with the likes of a hedonist such as Bentham, hence the term "universalisability".

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    There are obvious problems with both Act and Rule Utilitarianism. Both theories share the common goal of achieving the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. However, it is impossible to measure or compare happiness, as one persons happiness may not necessarily be another’s. And how do we measure intangible gain, such as happiness against material gain, such as money? The root principle is a good concept, but it’s the means to which we arrive at the end that cause the problems. In…

    • 480 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    It critically examines these procedures in the moral dilemma with reference of applying the concepts: rule and act utilitarianism. Should we give these beggars money or not? In deciding whether we give or not, the answer for that is we should give. Why? Act utilitarianism basically states that an action is moral if it produces the greatest happiness for the most people. This reason alone the act of giving them would be a good idea, because it would benefit the most amount of people. At a first glance…

    • 512 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Act Utilitarianism vs Rule Utilitarianism Our world is governed by rules, either implied or implemented, and early on we are taught to live by these rules. Society expects us to act in such a way that will conform to these rules in order to live happy, harmonious lives. We do things, careful not to break any of the rules that might hurt or cause harm to others. Sometimes though, we do things not in accordance with the rules but based on what we feel is the right thing to do. Some people believe…

    • 549 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Rule Utilitarianism

    • 1524 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Utilitarianism was developed in the 18th century by Hutchenson, who used the phrase "the greatest good for the greatest number" to describe his theory. His idea of Utilitarianism, however, seeks to find a rational means of assessing how best to put this promotion of happiness into practice, and is split into two types; Act Utilitarianism is the earliest form, in which what is deemed right is based on the assessment of results of a particular action, and Rule Utilitarianism, which allows to be taken…

    • 1524 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    schools of thought can be used to address a moral conflict. Throughout our class we have discussed many theories and strategies to help understand why moral conflicts get solved different ways. These theories, particularly ethical egoism and act/rule utilitarianism, can be used to explore different ways in deciding the morality of whether or not Sarah would steal. Ethical egoism is defined as “the theory that the right action is the one that advances one’s own best interests.” (Vaughn, 78) According…

    • 589 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    ethical theory. For a discussion of John Stuart Mill's essay Utilitarianism (1861), see Utilitarianism (book). The Utilitarianism series, part of the Politics series Utilitarian Thinkers[show] Jeremy Bentham John Stuart Mill Henry Sidgwick Peter Singer Forms[show] preference utilitarianism rule utilitarianism act utilitarianism Two-level utilitarianism Total utilitarianism Average utilitarianism Negative utilitarianism animal welfare Abolitionism (bioethics) Hedonism…

    • 5761 Words
    • 24 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Rule Utilitarianism

    • 195 Words
    • 1 Page

    1. Rule utilitarianism is to make sure the rule promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Rule utilitarianism sees things objectively with consequences and develops the rules. In this Nurofen case, they do deceptive advertising which sell new type of medicine with the same ingredients of drug in different package and double its pricing. This is intended to increase their company profits. But, Nurofen did not think about their brand name in the long term. After being found…

    • 195 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Act of Utilitarianism

    • 368 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Act utilitarianism states that, when faced with a choice, we must first consider the likely consequences of potential actions and, from that, choose to do what we believe will generate the most pleasure. The rule utilitarian, on the other hand, begins by looking at potential rules of action. To determine whether a rule should be followed, he or she looks at what would happen if it were constantly followed. If adherence to the rule produces more happiness than otherwise, it is a rule that morally…

    • 368 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Act Utilitarianism

    • 2703 Words
    • 11 Pages

    Ethics The field of ethics ( or moral philosophy) involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior. Ethics is the philosophical study of the moral value of human conduct and of the rules and principles that ought to govern it and there are two levels: on individual level and on society level. On individual level is a person’s own moral beliefs i.e. what he accepts as right and wrong, good or bad. For example, vegetarian and non-vegetarian and on society…

    • 2703 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Act Utilitarianism

    • 916 Words
    • 4 Pages

    morally justifiable/permissible only with situations, in which you can guarantee the best possible outcome. In this particular situation with the bomber, I believe we should take the Utilitarian-Act Consequentialism approach; and torture the bomber as an attempt to get him to reveal the location. Simply because, Act Consequentialism will focus more on the overall happiness that it will bring to all those involved. Seeing as how they have apprehended the bomber, and interrogated him to no avail. It is the…

    • 916 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays