Throughout this essay I will be comparing the Act and Rule variations of Utilitarianism to uncover the difference between the two. Utilitarianism is teleological or consequentialist approach to ethics, which argues that something is good or bad according to its benefit for the majority of the people. Jeremy Bentham formalized this theory through his principle of Utility, “the greatest good for the greatest number”. Act Utilitarianism is often linked to Jeremy Bentham’s principle of Utility as it follows the one rule – “the greatest good for the greatest number”. So an individual action is only right if it promotes happiness. Rule utilitarianism argues that moral rules, also based on the principle of Utility, should be kept by everyone in similar circumstances.
Act Utilitarianism states that one must decide what action will lead to the greatest good in a particular situation and apply the principle of utility directly. You need to look at the consequences of a particular act and what will bring about the greatest happiness. This makes it teleological as it focuses on the consequences and end point (telos). Act Utilitarianism is also very flexible due it being relative to a situation, rules can vary. There are no necessary moral rules except one: that we should always seek the greatest happiness for the greatest number in all situations. This form of Utilitarianism is therefore closely linked to Bentham’s form of Utilitarianism. An example of where Act Utilitarianism would be imposed is if you were a bodyguard protecting the President and you tackled him down to the floor to save him from being shot, it can be argued that you tackling him down brings little good or happiness, however the consequence of saving his life brings a greater happiness.
Rule Utilitarianism is commonly linked with John Stuart Mill. Rule utilitarians believe that rules should be formed using utilitarian principles