Classical Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism:
A thought investigation into the strive for equality.

Utilitarianism is a consequentialist philosophy, where motives and actions are disregarded and only the end result is accounted for (Rachels 2009). Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that is based on the idea that the proper course of action is the one that maximises the quantified ‘utility’. Utility is the unit of measurement that to describes the benefit individuals can gain from an action. Utilitarianism argues that the greater the utility, the greater benefit to society. (Racheals 2009).
Rachels’ claims that there are three characteristics of Utilitarianism: 1. Only consequences matter 2. Only the happiness of unhappiness of consequences matter
According to the classical theorists pleasure is the only intrinsic good (Daniels 2013). Later thought leaders have discussed that individual preference satisfaction should be maximised, given that individual experiences shape preferences.
To contextualise hedonist utility maximisation, one can imagine a scenario where a global corporation made anti-depressants, however, the factory conditions are poor and their workers are on average, depressed. Every 100 units of anti depressants made cause 100 people to gain pleasure. For every 100 units made, 20 workers become depressed. Therefore, there is a net pleasure increase of 80 individuals. A classical Utilitarian would argue that making those 80 individuals happy is more important than the 20 workers pleasure.

After long deliberation on Classic Utilitarianism, twenty- first century philosophers found classic utilitarianism to be is riddled with flaws, and as such the moral agent should use either 1) Act, or 2) Rule Utilitarianism (Daniels 2013). Rule Utilitarianism holds that one should always follow rules that tend to promote general welfare, even at the expense of greater utility. Act Utilitarianism holds that one should always act as to promote general welfare (Racheals 2009). These developments of utilitarianism make it easier to apply to the individuals own actions, without having to equate others individual
If the moral agent were to be able to successfully be impartial the time consumed calculating utility ramifications would result in a net loss of utility. If the individual were occupied worrying about infinite event ramifications they would be too preoccupied to gain any utility of their own.
This is a fundamental flaw with classical utilitarianism, hence why later philosophers followed an Act or Rule approach. A Rule Utilitarian would be reasonable to suggest that the moral agents should only worry about their own ethical actions. Racheals’ would argue that if rule utilitarians were only concerned about their own actions, it would negate the second requirement of Utilitarianism, because it wouldn’t be impartial and would become a subjective measure of utility.

Conclusively, Utilitarianism provides a practical framework for fairness of decision making in society. However, stipulations about the impartialness of the philosophy make Utilitarianism a challenging ethical theory to adhere to.
Human nature begets impartialness is unrealistic, therefore making Utilitarianism obsolete in its current state.