Ethics exam question practice
UTILITARIANISM
1. Define act utilitarianism (3)
Act utilitarianism, created by Jeremy Bentham is a quantitative consequentialist teleological
approach to ethics that works on a case-by-case basis with the hedonic calculus. Act
utilitarianism states that it is pain and pleasure which determines what is good. Actions are
morally right or wrong depending on their consequences and nothing else. An act is right if it
maximises what is good. This is ‘act consequentialism’. The only thing that is good is happiness,
understood as pleasure and the absence of pain. This is ‘hedonism’. No one’s happiness counts
more than anyone else’s. This is a commitment to equality.
2. Define rule utilitarianism (3)
For rule utilitarianism, an action is right if it complies with the right rules and a rule is morally
right if people following it creates the greatest happiness. Rule utilitarianism creates rules that
will increase the overall happiness of society. Rule utilitarianism is a qualitative theory and
distinguishes between higher and lower pleasures.
3. What is the di8erence between act and rule utilitarianism (3)
Act utilitarianism judges pleasure by the quantity (hedonic calculus) and judges the
consequences of individual acts. Rule utilitarianism judges pleasure by the quality (with higher
and lower pleasures) considers the consequences that result of following a rule of conduct.
4. Explain the principle of utility (3)
The principle that approves or disapproves of every action according to the tendency it appears
to have to increase or lesson the happiness of the person or group whose interest is in question
5. Explain Mill’s proof of utilitarianism (5)
P1. The end (the aim) of our desires is happiness.
P2. Things are desirable in so far as people desire it in the same way sounds are audible in so far
as people hear them. Mill’s comparison between physical objects and their properties and
happiness and pleasure being natural properties strengthens his empirical hold on morality.
P3. Personal happiness is a good to each person.
P4 As society is a sum of individual interest, general happiness is a good for this sum of
interests (this refers to the principle of utility).
C therefore the Good is happiness.
P3. bridges the fact value distinction. Mill makes the fundamental assumption that pleasure
and happiness are the Good and doesn’t prove it; it requires no evidence as it sees it as self-
evident.
6. Define higher and lower pleasures (3)
Higher pleasures are superior pleasures and only available to human beings. They are pleasures
of the mind and are intellectual such as reading, poetry or studying philosophy. Lower pleasures
are inferior pleasures and are available to all. They do not enrich or enhance intellect such as
sex, tv or eating food.
7. Define non hedonistic utilitarianism (3)
, Utilitarianism is the argument that the morality of action is derived from its consequences and
that the most ethical choice is the one that will produce the greatest good for the greatest
number. Non-hedonistic utilitarianism abandons hedonism/happiness as too uncertain and
says that an action is good if it maximises the preferences of those involved. The good is not
reduced to happiness or pleasure but is rather determined by non-hedonistic commitment such
as the satisfaction in interests or preferences.
8. What is the di8erence between hedonistic and non-hedonistic utilitarianism (5)
Both argue that the morality of action is derived from its consequences. Utilitarianism holds
that the most ethical choice is the one that will produce the greatest good for the greatest
number.
Hedonistic utilitarianism: the good is reducible to pleasure/happiness.
Non hedonistic utilitarianism: The good is not reduced to happiness or pleasure but is rather
determined by non-hedonistic commitment such as the satisfaction in interests or preferences.
9. Outline Bentham’s quantitative hedonistic utilitarianism. (5)
Bentham’s quantitative hedonistic utilitarianism, also known as act utilitarianism, is a
consequentialist teleological approach to ethics that works on a case-by-case basis with the
hedonic calculus. As a quantitative theory, act utilitarianism each action is of equal value,
“push pin is of equal value…as poetry” and the best decisions are the ones that maximise utility
(producing happiness/pleasure). Act utilitarianism uses the hedonic calculus, where pains and
pleasures are considered and compared to by factors such as the extent, duration or intensity of
the action. As a consequentialist theory, utilitarianism states if an action is good by looking at
the outcome not the intention.
10. Explain how an act utilitarian would make a moral decision (5)
Utilitarians, as consequentialists, decide whether actions are morally right or wrong based on
their eZects. The best decision would be the decision that maximises utility. A utilitarian would
seek to maximise utility for all aZected and their own individual happiness would only count as
it aZected the net total and utilitarianism follows impartiality, “every man to count for one,
nobody for more than one”. An act utilitarian would apply this general utility maximisation
principle directly to each action on a case by case basis. This view may profitably be compared
with rule utilitarianism, which applies the maximisation principle to the rules used to guide
action such that individual actions are right/wrong, based on whether or not they conform to the
chosen rules. They would only consider the consequences of the action and not the action
itself. One consequence of this is that the same action might be considered right on some
occasions but wrong on others. The hedonic calculus where the pleasures and pains caused by
various options are compared with respect to their intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity,
fecundity, purity and extent.
11. Explain the issue faced by utilitarianism, that pleasure is the only good. (5)
The issue of pleasure being the only good is shown with Nozick’s experience machine. Nozick
came up with a thought experiment that gives the example of a machine which could simulate a
fake reality full of only positive pleasurable experiences, and asks the question ‘would people
choose plug themselves into it?’ Nozick suggests not everyone would because humans value
their connection to reality and having authentic real experiences. Nozick attacks the
foundational premise of utilitarianism: that we only ultimately desire pleasure/happiness.
Bentham presupposes psychological hedonism in order to argue for ethical hedonism
P1. Bentham claims that as a matter of fact all we desire is happiness/pleasure
, P2. If as a matter of fact all we desire is happiness/pleasure, then we would have no good
reason not to plug into the experience machine (assuming it increased the quantity of pleasure
experienced)
P3. However we do have good reasons not to plug into the experience machine, such as that: we
care about what actually is the case, not just how things seem, we want to be connected to
reality or we want to be able to change reality and we want to share reality with other people and
to aZect them
C. Therefore, Bentham’s claim that as a matter of fact we desire is happiness/pleasure is not
true
12. Explain the issue of fairness and individual rights faced by utilitarianism. (5)
Utilitarianism is consequentialist and argues that something is only good not because of
anything intrinsic but depending on whether the action’s consequences lead to happiness. This
leads to some problems with rights. The issue with rights is that they should be protected, and
there are certain moral constraints that should never be violated. Fairness is to do with justice,
there are certain moral constraints you should never violate: innocents shouldn’t be punished.
Bentham – natural rights ‘nonsense on stilts’
So, Utilitarianism could never say ‘X is wrong’ or ‘X is right’. They can only say that ‘X is
right/wrong if it leads to/doesn’t lead to – the greatest happiness for the greatest number’.
In that case, a utilitarian couldn’t say ‘torture is wrong’. In fact, if 10 people gained happiness
from torturing one person, a utilitarian it seems would have to say that was morally right as it led
to the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Therefore utilitarianism leads to the tyranny
of the majority, which is when a majority of people decide to exploit a minority, for their benefit,
which ignores fairness and individual rights.
We have to protect rights regardless of their utility, we value liberty, fairness and individual
liberties and rights as ends in themselves which need to be protected
13. Explain why partiality is an issue for utilitarianism. (5)
Utilitarianism states that we should do whatever action leads to the greatest happiness for the
greatest number of people, society is a sum of individual interests. This requires that we put
aside any personal feelings or desire to do otherwise. To follow Utilitarianism seems to require
that we act impartially. This problem is seen and felt most keenly in moral situations where
family or friends are involved. For example, if a person were faced with having to choose
between saving a family member’s life or five unknown people. The Utilitarian calculation would
be that saving the five unknown people would maximise happiness. Even though it might cause
a lifetime of unhappiness to the person making the choice and the family who would suZer the
loss of the one person, that seems clearly outweighed by the benefit to overall happiness of
saving the five people This suggests that utilitarianism is incompatible with human psychology.
It therefore cannot successfully guide action and thus fails as a normative theory
14. Explain why utilitarianism ignores both the moral integrity and the intentions of the
individual. (12)
Utilitarianism ignores the moral integrity of an individual because utilitarianism will always be
able to create a situation where X is the right thing to do, meaning that utilitarianism
undermines our personal integrity. This can be seen with the example of ‘Jim and the Indians’,
where Jim is told to shoot one person in order to save the rest as it will produce the greatest
happiness for the greatest number, but this undermines Jim’s moral integrity as he is forced to
cross a line that he doesn’t want to cross, therefore the action cannot be deemed as good.
, Utilitarianism ignores the intentions of an individual because it only focuses on the
consequences of an action, not the motive. Intentions have moral value too, not just
consequences, this can be seen with an example of a person intending to harm by intending to
poison a city’s water system but accidentally saving others as the poison ended up being able to
cure cancer– even though the consequence turned out good, the intention was immoral, so
therefore the action cannot be deemed as good.
15. Outline act utilitarianism and explain why it faces an issue with fairness and individual
rights. (12)
Act utilitarianism is a moral theory associated with Jeremy Bentham. It is a form of
consequentialism, which means it evaluates the morality of actions based on their
consequences. Bentham believed that pleasure and pain are the only two fundamental factors
that determine the value of an action. Individuals naturally seek pleasure and avoid pain which
means the Good can be identified with pleasure.
Act utilitarianism asserts that the right action is the one that maximizes overall happiness or
pleasure and minimizes pain and suffering for the greatest number of people. It considers
actions on a case by case basis and on the basis of their utility. The morally right action is the
one that produces the greatest overall happiness, regardless of individual interests or the
motives behind the action. This is called the principle of utility: an action is morally right if it
produces the greatest amount of overall happiness (pleasure) and the least amount of suffering
(pain) when compared to alternative actions.
However, act utilitarianism can be criticised on the basis that it doesn’t protect nor guarantees
individual liberties and rights; this is because of its focus on maximizing overall happiness and
its potential to justify actions that infringe upon the rights or freedoms of individuals when doing
so might produce greater overall happiness. It's theoretically possible to justify actions such as
torture, unjust imprisonment, or violation of privacy if it could be argued that these actions
would lead to greater overall happiness. It may sometimes justify actions that harm a minority
or even a single individual if doing so would result in greater happiness for the majority. This
approach raises concerns about the protection of individual rights and the potential for tyranny
of the majority: however, there are certain moral constraints you should never violate: for
example the preservation of rights (to life or liberty.) The point of rights is that they should be
protected: they have inherent value and ought to be protected.
Act utilitarianism therefore lacks the inherent moral constraints or rules to safeguard individual
rights and liberties and because of this, it is not a correct moral theory.
16. Outline Mill’s qualitative hedonistic utilitarianism. (5)
Mill’s qualitative hedonistic utilitarianism, also known as rule utilitarianism, creates rules that
will increase the overall happiness of society and therefore places importance on the principle
of universability where what is good for one is good for all and everyone should aim for the
happiness of everyone.
Rule utilitarianism is a qualitative theory meaning it looks at the quality of an action and
distinguishes between higher and lower pleasures. Higher pleasures are superior pleasures that
are only available to human beings and are pleasures of the mind or intellect such as poetry,
playing an instrument or studying philosophy. Lower pleasures are inferior pleasures that are
available to all and do not enhance or enrich intellect such as eating, TV and sex.
17. Outline non hedonistic utilitarianism (5)
Non hedonistic utilitarianism, also known as preference utilitarianism, argues that the 7th
criteria of the hedonic calculus – extent – is the most important. An action is good if it
maximises the satisfaction of the preferences of those involved. Singer argued that when
