Consequentialism And Rule Utilitarianism

This paper will discuss the differences between rule utilitarianism and act utilitarianism, and whether or not the former is an adequate alternative to the latter with regards to consistency with ideas of right and wrong. This topic is particularly poignant because, like many philosophical questions, it does not have a definite answer, as both sides have their own deficiencies.

Consequentialism, which is a segment of the grander Value Theory, asserts that the rightness or wrongness of an action is a matter of measuring the outcome of the action itself. Moral decisions can then depend on the latent costs and/or benefits that result from doing the action. Utilitarianism, the most popular form of consequentialism, is in the same vein with regard to moral actions and their likely consequences. A utilitarian will attempt to question the results of an action as would a consequentialist, however they ask the additional question: “furthermore, how much pleasure (happiness) would be created by the action?” A utilitarian’s moral concentration is on maximizing pleasure, as the utilitarian maxim affirms that one should act always as to maximize total pleasure. Maximizing total pleasure, a utilitarian believes, is equivalent to minimizing total pain, and this forms the basis for morality.

Utilitarianism, hoping to promote, “the greatest good for the greatest number of people”, can have multiple associations. Act utilitarianism, often linked to philosopher Jeremy Bentham, relies on the nature of rationality and common sense. Bentham reasoned that in order to be considered rational, one must start with the values they actually have. He believed that this was integral in determining what was important to you, because in order to prove that s...

... middle of paper ...

...as ranking your pleasures in order from greatest to least, which will result in a clear answer as to what is most pleasurable.

While act and rule utilitarianism may have been created under the idea that an action is wrong if it produces pain and good if it produces pleasure, I believe rule utilitarianism to be a superior structure to consider when making ethical decisions; however, like any philosophical framework it does has its flaws. Both contexts attempt to maximize the utility of the participants as a whole, but rule utilitarianism is a stronger in reaching ethical decisions because it stays consistent with the rules by which the most pleasure is produced every time. With the establishment of rules, more than just a solitary act is considered; therefore, the rules can be applied repetitively under any similar circumstance where the same rule is in question.