Utilitarianism

AO1 (Knowledge) – 15 prompts

What does teleological or consequentialist thinking focus on when judging moral actions?
How does the Principle of Utility determine the best moral action in Utilitarianism?
Why did Bentham view happiness as the “sovereign good”?
How do pleasure and pain form the basis of morality in Bentham’s Utilitarianism?
What is the purpose of Bentham’s Hedonic Calculus?
What are the seven criteria used in the Hedonic Calculus?
What distinguishes Act Utilitarianism from Rule Utilitarianism?
What is the difference between strong and weak rule utilitarianism?
Why does Act Utilitarianism apply the Hedonic Calculus to each situation individually?
How does Rule Utilitarianism use past experiences to guide moral actions?
How does weak Rule Utilitarianism treat rules when making moral decisions?
Why is Act Utilitarianism considered straightforward and observable in moral decision-making?
How does the Hedonic Calculus aim to calculate the greatest happiness for the greatest number?
Why is Rule Utilitarianism described as practical due to its use of universal rules?
Why is Bentham’s quantitative approach seen as morally democratic?

AO2 (Evaluation) – 15 prompts

Why would Kant criticise utilitarianism’s ability to justify harmful acts for a happy outcome?
Why did Mill criticise Bentham’s quantitative approach to happiness?
Why does the example of Pontius Pilate support Mill’s criticism of quantitative utilitarianism?
Why does Karl Barth argue the Hedonic Calculus is impractical?
How does W.D. Ross criticise utilitarianism for ignoring duty or obligation?
Why does Augustine argue pleasure is an unreliable basis for moral decisions?
Why might Aquinas’ Natural Law be considered stronger than Bentham’s hedonism?
How does Bentham’s Hedonic Calculus support the idea that pleasure can be measured to reach moral decisions?
Why does Bentham compare the human pursuit of pleasure to Aquinas’ idea of natural orientation toward goods?
Why did Mill insist on distinguishing between higher and lower pleasures?
Why do some argue it is impossible to measure ‘good’ or ‘pleasure’ objectively?
How might utilitarianism lead to morally wrong outcomes due to majority preference?
Why is basing morality on pleasure criticised for encouraging selfish behaviour?
How can utilitarianism justify immoral acts if they maximise overall pleasure?
Why does the subjectivity of pleasure challenge the reliability of utilitarian moral decisions?

AO1 – Answers

It focuses on the end or purpose of an action, judging morality by outcomes and choosing whatever creates the greatest happiness for the greatest number.
It decides the best action by assessing which outcome is most useful, meaning which option maximises happiness or pleasure for the greatest number.
Bentham saw happiness as the sovereign good, linked morality to pleasure, and judged actions by the total pleasure they produce through a utilitarian calculation.
Pleasure and pain are the two sovereign masters guiding human behaviour, shaping what we ought to do since morally good actions produce the greatest good for the greatest number.
It measures all pleasure and pain an action might produce using criteria like intensity, duration and certainty, helping us choose the action that creates the most overall happiness.
The seven criteria are intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity and extent.
Act utilitarianism judges each individual action by its consequences, while rule utilitarianism creates general rules based on past experiences; strong rules must always be followed, while weak rules can be broken if happiness will increase.
It uses the Hedonic Calculus for each new situation because past cases don’t determine present actions, making decisions more focused on individual acts than the overall majority.
It uses past experiences to form rules that usually maximise happiness, and weak rule utilitarianism allows breaking rules in exceptional cases to increase overall happiness.
Act utilitarianism is clear and practical because it simply measures consequences to maximise pleasure, while rule utilitarianism uses general rules that usually increase happiness.
Weak rule utilitarianism sees rules as guidance that can be broken if greater happiness results.
Act utilitarianism is straightforward because it relies on one clear aim — maximising pleasure and minimising pain — and judges moral actions through observable consequences.
The calculus aims to measure all aspects of pleasure and pain to show which action produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number.
Rule utilitarianism is practical because universal rules based on past experience usually bring about the greatest happiness and give people a clear guide.
Bentham’s approach is morally democratic because it treats everyone’s pleasure equally and seeks to maximise happiness for the greatest number.

AO2 – Answers

Kant argues it can justify harming an innocent person if it creates a happier outcome, which he sees as morally unacceptable.
Mill said Bentham focused too much on quantity of happiness instead of quality, allowing unjust actions to be justified.
Pontius Pilate executing Jesus shows how quantitative pleasure can support injustice if it benefits the majority.
Barth argues humans are corrupt and can’t calculate pleasure accurately, making the calculus impractical.
Ross says utilitarianism ignores duty, meaning commitments like promise-keeping could be overridden for the sake of pleasure.
Augustine says pleasure is unreliable because humans are fallen and easily driven by lust or selfishness.
Natural Law is stronger because it uses universal precepts based on God-given reason rather than fluctuating pleasure.
The calculus supports the idea that pleasure can be measured through structured criteria to determine moral decisions.
Bentham believed humans naturally seek pleasure, similar to Aquinas’ view that humans have a natural orientation toward goods.
Mill distinguished higher and lower pleasures to avoid crude pleasure-seeking and ensure moral decisions reflect intellectual quality, not just quantity.
Critics say pleasure is subjective, so it cannot be measured objectively, making moral calculation unreliable.
Majority preference can justify immoral actions, meaning utilitarianism risks ignoring the rights of minorities.
Using pleasure as a basis for morality can encourage selfish behaviour that harms others.
If an act maximises overall pleasure, utilitarianism could justify wrongdoing, even serious injustices.
Pleasure varies from person to person, making utilitarian decisions unstable because there is no consistent standard for what counts as good.