Act utilitarianism is the theory where the principle of utility is applied only to every individual situation. In act utilitarianism there are no moral rules except that the principle of the greatest happiness for the greatest number is applied in each situation. Act utilitarianism was devised by Jeremy Bentham which he believed human beings were motivated by pleasure and pain and therefore they may do anything which brings out 'the greatest good for the greatest number.' He believed people must measure their actions by using the hedonic calculus as it weighs up the pain and pleasure generated by the available moral actions to find the best possible outcome. In this type of utilitarianism the pleasure is measured in quantity.
Usefulness refers to the amount of pleasure or happiness caused by an action-hence its theological ethical theory which determines a good act by the ends it brings about. The theory is best known as the greatest happiness principle. Bentham stated ‘an action is right if it produces the greatest good for the greatest number’ where the greatest good is the greatest pleasure or happiness and the least pain or sadness, and the greatest number are the majority of people. Good is the maximisation of pleasure and the minimisation of pain. This theory can be applied in fact both to animals and humans and each individual is equal.
The theory’s central question is: how we ought to act. Through a cost-benefit analysis, impartial decisions on actions should be made as long as the end result measures an increase of happiness for the majority. To the contrary, Kantian ethics focus on the intrinsic value and moral standing of human beings as rational agents with autonomy; therefore, they must be treated equally and with dignity. An action is not made right according to its consequences but on the consistency of one’s ethical course of action by means of reasoning to attain the right behavior. The main concepts behind Kantian theory are generated from the Categorical Imperative, used as an ethical rule for decision-making to determine the right action.
These theorists believe erasing vices builds good moral character (Cline, 2012). Utilitarianism relates to normative ethics. This type of ethics stems from the English philosophers John Mill and Jeremy Bentham. The main premise of Utilitarianism is that actions are right if the promotion of happiness arises. Also if the opposite of happiness is a product of personal ethics it is a wrong
His idea of justice within society is a relatively equal society which benefits all. By having its members hidden under a “veil of ignorance” and naturally working under the fundamental principles of liberty and distributive justice, a society will benefit all of its individuals and grow as a whole to maximize potential. Rawls, in a way sees justice as the product of a progressing state of a balanced society. The more modern libertarian philosopher, Robert Nozick, carries a very different opinion of what justice is within a society. Unlike Rawls, Nozick sees flaws in the difference principle.
Utilitarianism maintains that the moral worth of any action is determined solely by whether the ac- tion’s outcome is useful in maximizing utility. Utility is understood as pleasure (transcending primi- tive and “sensational” pleasures that also animals can feel) and the absence of pain. Utilitarianism comprises certain core principles. In order to evaluate an action, its likely outcomes need to be consi- dered with regard to their utility level. The question whether an action is due to good intentions is subordinate (consequentialism).
Bentham believed humans were motivated by two things pleasure and pain which was a moral fact with pleasure being the sole good and pain the sole bad. Secondly there was the principle of utility which is the idea that an act is right or wrong based on its usefulness. Bentham said “an act is right if it causes the greatest good for the greatest number”. This is a teleological theory. Finally there is the hedonic calculus.
The basic formulation of the categorical imperative states: “Act only on that maxim whereby thou canst at the same time will that it should become a universal law”. Similarly, Mill theorizes under the principle of utility, which means that actions are good if they promote happiness, and wrong if they produce the reverse of happiness because pleasure and the absence of pain are the only things desirable as ends. The Greatest Happiness Principle states
Kant wanted to put good will at the very centre of ethics in which he formed the equation GOOD WILL + DUTY = A MORAL ACTION. Good will is the motive that produces our determination to be good people and our practical reason helps us get there ‘good will, then, like a jewel, will shine by its own light, a thing which has its whole value in itself’. Kant’s moral theory looks at evidence and tells you what ought to be done. Reason is universal. However to act morally then we must be capable of exercising freedom or the autonomy of the will .The opposite of this is what Kant did not believe in and this is heteronomy and that is something is right because its satisfies some desire, emotion, goal or obligation.
Classical Liberals were largely influenced by Jeremy Bentham and his idea of utilitarianism, they argue that individuals act in a way that will gain them ultimate pleasure and happiness, of which they alone judge the quality and are free from any paternal authority. Individuals were to make decisions themselves based on what gave them more or less utility. John Stuart Mill also shared the belief that no authority has the right to claim they know more about the individual’s interests. This leads to the belief in a minimal state that should only make decisions based on the greatest happiness. Modern Liberals, however, see the individual as somebody who is driven by self-development as opposed to an egoistic being.