Examples Of Act Utilitarianism

Finding a solution to punishment is not an easy task and is a problem that has generated many solutions. With all these solutions to punishment, I have chosen Act-Utilitarianism to analyze in this paper. My assertion is that Act-Utilitarianism is not a viable solution to the problem of punishment. I believe this because Act-Utilitarianism, while attempting to maximize overall utility, often leads to situations where the wrong answers are given to moral questions. This results in Act-Utilitarianism finding justification for punishment in bad moral theories, thus invalidating any justification given. While I do not believe that Act-Utilitarianism is an acceptable solution to the problem of punishment, there are some who support it. Act-Utilitarianism
In the instance of punishment, Act-Utilitarianism states that punishing an individual is only good if it promotes the greatest utility. Looking at an example will help to understand this view.
Suppose a student, Alex, cheats on an exam and is caught doing so. Most would agree that what Alex did was wrong and that he should be punished. From an Act-Utilitarian point of view, expelling Alex would do multiple things. It would prevent him from cheating further as well as deterring other students from cheating in the future. The harm that will come to Alex from his expulsion does not outweigh the benefit that the university will receive from expelling him, thus Act-Utilitarianism states that this would be the correct answer to the problem making this view initially attractive to
Most people would agree in saying that they feel an increased sense of duty to those they care about over strangers and this presents a huge flaw. Act-Utilitarianism requires that people evaluate situations, especially those involving punishment, with impartiality to accurately determine what action would lead to the greatest utility. To prove why this response is successful, let us look once more to the case of the cheating student. In this scenario, Alex is cheating and the professor is his relative. As I have previously mentioned, Act-Utilitarianism would dictate that Alex be punished by expulsion therefore creating the greatest overall utility. But, because Alex’s professor is personally connected to him, we cannot reliably expect the professor to evaluate this situation impartially the way that Act-Utilitarianism requires. Subsequently, Act-Utilitarianism does not recognize people’s desire to be preferential and therefore cannot hold up. Even if the correct answers are not morally wrong, it is unreasonable to expect impartiality from people regarding personal associates further nullifying Act-Utilitarianism as an answer to