Subscribe to TermPapersMonthly.com and get access to over 100,000 Essays.
Submitted by edt1114 on 07/01/2009 03:11 AM Flag This Paper
Join Now
According to the author, act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism are two contrasting views that he argues are actually more identical to one another than they may seem. The first view, act-utilitarianism, is the view that the rightness or wrongness of an action is judged by the consequences of the action itself. This group, he explains, follows one cardinal rule: to maximize probable benefit. Simply put, whatever consequence seems to have the most beneficial outcome is the correct thing to do, no matter who or what receives the most benefit. On the other hand, rule-utilitarianism is the view that the rightness or wrongness of an action is judged by the goodness and badness of the consequences of a rule that everyone should perform the action in like circumstances. This group, the author explains, is much more dependent on rules and do not like to break them. This group is also ultimately concerned with human happiness, although the problem arises that it is possible for a rule not to be beneficial to us. The author seems to prefer act-utilitarianism over rule-utilitarianism for a number of reasons.
The fact that rule-utilitarianism requires such obedience to rules is one reason the author does not like this view. He states that in many cases there are situations where outcomes are not known ahead of time, and can be numerous. This requires that exceptions must be made depending on the consequence, something that act-utilitarianism supports. I agree with the author on his opinion, and it seems to be the case in many situations where outcomes are unknown that breaking the rules is often necessary to receive the best outcome.
Another reason the author seems to accept act-utilitarianism over rule-utilitarianism is that rule-utilitarianism ultimately “collapses” into act-utilitarianism. He explains that rule-utilitarianism allows for modification of rules to make something more beneficial. If that is the case, then it is no more different than act-utilitarianism...