Compare Rule and Act Utilitarians Paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Compare Rule and Act Utilitarians Paper - Essay Example It thinks more of the long term goals (Hayry, 2002). There are two forms of Utilitarianism. That is act Utilitarianism and other is rule Utilitarianism. They both are different and opposite from each other. Act Utilitarianism tells us that the basis of utility should be directly applied for each individual situation. In this, there is a point of view that the most happiness is for the greatest number of humans. The humans decide what to do after looking at that from where the most happiness is generated. In rule Utilitarianism it is told that what we should do to achieve the most wanted consequences and then the act that is seen is best for the majority is chosen (Lyons, 1965). In act Utilitarianism first the consequences are taken into sight of an act. The one with the better consequence is chosen. While the rule Utilitarianism looks at the consequence and then decide which rule to follow. Only that rule is selected that has the greatest utility or happiness whether the law is applied with fairness or not. Its aim is to deal people with fairness. It gives great value to justice. While in act Utilitarianism, it is to benefit the majority but sometimes the feelings are also hurt. Rule and Act Utilitarianism have one thing similar that they are interlinked with the prediction of future however; it is also a fact that predictions are not always right. This can lead to abrupt results which does not benefit the people. As act Utilitarianism is mainly concerned with gaining more good. The rights of the individuals are violated for benefiting the majority. But sometimes it happens that the decision taken is good but at the same time, it is thought that it is not beneficial for the people. It is because of the things that are changed (Crisp, 1997). Rule Utilitarianism constrains its usefulness. Rule Utilitarian believes that the rules should be followed as they benefit the majority (Hayry, 2002). While in