Is the right action always the one that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number?
explain and evaluate utilitarianism, including the principle of utility, act and rule versions, and major objections
A focused QCE Unit 4 answer on utilitarianism. Covers Bentham's principle of utility and hedonic calculus, Mill's higher and lower pleasures, the act and rule versions, and major objections including justice, demandingness and the separateness of persons.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
QCAA wants you to explain and evaluate the most influential consequentialist ethical theory: utilitarianism. You need the principle of utility, the contributions of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, the distinction between act and rule utilitarianism, and the standard objections. This is prime IA and external-exam material for moral philosophy.
The answer
The principle of utility
Utilitarianism holds that the right action is the one that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number. It is a form of consequentialism: the morality of an act depends only on its consequences, not on intentions, rules or the kind of act it is. Jeremy Bentham, in An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789), stated the principle of utility: actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce its opposite.
Bentham's hedonic calculus
Bentham was a hedonist: happiness is pleasure and the absence of pain, and all pleasures count equally in kind. To measure utility he proposed the hedonic (felicific) calculus, weighing pleasures and pains by factors such as intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity (nearness), fecundity, purity and extent (how many are affected). Each person's pleasure counts equally: "everybody to count for one, nobody for more than one."
Mill's refinement: higher and lower pleasures
John Stuart Mill, in Utilitarianism (1863), defended the theory against the charge that it is a "doctrine worthy only of swine." He distinguished higher pleasures (intellectual, aesthetic, moral) from lower (bodily) pleasures, arguing the higher are superior in quality, not just quantity. His test: competent judges who have experienced both prefer the higher. Hence his line that it is better to be a dissatisfied human than a satisfied pig, because the human knows both sides.
Act versus rule utilitarianism
- Act utilitarianism assesses each individual act by its consequences: do whatever maximises utility in this case.
- Rule utilitarianism assesses rules: follow the rules whose general adoption would maximise utility (such as "keep promises," "do not punish the innocent"). Rule utilitarianism aims to avoid the troubling one-off acts that act utilitarianism might license, while keeping a consequentialist foundation.
Major objections
- Justice and rights: utilitarianism can apparently justify punishing an innocent person, or sacrificing a minority, if doing so maximises total happiness. This seems to violate justice and individual rights.
- The separateness of persons (John Rawls): summing happiness across people treats society as if it were one person, ignoring that benefits to some do not simply compensate burdens on others.
- Demandingness: maximising overall good seems to require constant self-sacrifice, leaving no room for personal projects or for treating your own family specially.
- Measurement: comparing and aggregating different people's pleasures may be impossible in practice.
- Wrong intentions: because only consequences count, a good act done from malice is as right as one done from love, which many find counterintuitive.
Rule utilitarianism answers some objections (it forbids punishing the innocent as a rule), but critics argue it either collapses into act utilitarianism (break the rule when breaking it does most good) or becomes an unprincipled rule-worship.
Try this
Q1. State the principle of utility and explain Bentham's hedonic calculus. [4 marks]
- Cue. Maximise happiness for the greatest number; weigh pleasures and pains by intensity, duration, certainty, extent and so on.
Q2. Distinguish act from rule utilitarianism. [3 marks]
- Cue. Act assesses each act by its consequences; rule assesses rules whose general adoption maximises utility.
Q3. Explain the objection from justice. [3 marks]
- Cue. Maximising total happiness could justify punishing an innocent or sacrificing a minority, violating individual rights.
Related dot points
- explain and evaluate Kantian deontology, including the categorical imperative, the formula of universal law and the formula of humanity
A focused QCE Unit 4 answer on Kantian ethics. Covers the good will and duty, the categorical versus hypothetical imperative, the formula of universal law and the formula of humanity (treating persons as ends), and major objections including conflicting duties and rigidity.
- explain and evaluate Aristotelian virtue ethics, including eudaimonia, the doctrine of the mean and practical wisdom
A focused QCE Unit 4 answer on virtue ethics. Covers Aristotle's eudaimonia and function argument, virtue as a state of character, the doctrine of the mean, the role of practical wisdom and habituation, and objections including the guidance problem and cultural variation.
- explain and evaluate metaethical positions, including moral realism, relativism, subjectivism and emotivism
A focused QCE Unit 4 answer on metaethics. Covers the difference between normative and metaethics, cognitivism versus non-cognitivism, moral realism, cultural relativism, subjectivism, Ayer's emotivism, and Hume's is-ought gap, with objections to each.