Act utilitarianism
| Part of a series on |
| Utilitarianism |
|---|
| Philosophy portal |
Act utilitarianism is a utilitarian theory of ethics which states that a person's act is morally right if and only if it produces at least as much happiness as any other act that the person could perform at that time.[1] Classical utilitarians, including Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill, and Henry Sidgwick, define happiness as pleasure and the absence of pain.[2] To understand how act utilitarianism works, compare the consequences of your watching television all day tomorrow to the consequences of your doing charity work tomorrow. You could produce more overall happiness in the world by doing charity work tomorrow than by watching television all day tomorrow. According to act utilitarianism, then, the right thing for you to do tomorrow is to go out and do charity work; it is wrong for you to stay home and watch television all day.[3]
Act Utilitarianism is based on the Principle of Utility, which is the basis of all utilitarian theories and is best summed up in Bentham's well-known phrase, "the greatest good for the greatest number". Jeremy Bentham supported his theory with another famous quote of his, that "Nature has placed mankind under two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as determine what we shall do." Bentham's utilitarianism is a hedonistic theory and starts with the premise that people are in their very nature hedonistic. This means that he believed people would actively seek out pleasure and avoid pain, if given the opportunity.
Critics sometimes cite such prohibitions on leisure activities as a problem for act utilitarianism. Critics also cite more significant problems, such as the fact that act utilitarianism seems to imply that specific acts of torture or enslavement would be morally permissible if they produced enough happiness.[3]
Act utilitarianism is often contrasted with a different theory called rule utilitarianism. Rule utilitarianism states that the morally right action is the one that is in accordance with a moral rule whose general observance would create the most happiness. Act utilitarianism analyses a consequence of a decision as one particular act whereas rule utilitarianism evaluates a consequence as if it will be later replicated in the future. Act utilitarianism has a beginning approach to examine the consequences of a current act. Rule utilitarianism differs by assessing consequences based on a specific rule followed.[4] Rule utilitarianism is sometimes thought to avoid the problems associated with act utilitarianism.[1]
See also
- Rule utilitarianism
- Two-level utilitarianism
- Preference utilitarianism
- Jeremy Bentham
- Brad Hooker
- John Stuart Mill
- Peter Singer
References
- ^ a b Lyons, David. Forms and Limits of Utilitarianism. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965, p. vii.
- ^ Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter. "Consequentialism." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2011, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/#ClaUti.
- ^ a b Fieser, J. (2009). Ethics. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy , Retrieved from http://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/
- ^ "Difference Between Act and Rule Utilitarianism". DifferenceBetween.net. Retrieved 2 May 2014.
 | This article about ethics is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |