Utilitarianism is a consequentialist ethical framework. The consequences of an action are more important than the motivations behind the action or the action itself. An action has "utility" if it serves the greatest good. The basic principle of utilitarianism is creating the greatest good for the greatest number of people, or the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. The ethics of utilitarianism differ from ethical egoism in that the individual may make a sacrifice for the common good because it is the aggregate of happiness/goodness that matters, not maximizing individual happiness. Central to utilitarianism is the belief that all people are inherently equal and of equal consideration when making ethical decisions (p. 55). John Stuart Mill outlined the core tenets of utilitarianism, which became a fundamental component of Enlightenment political philosophy. Another utilitarian philosopher, Jeremy Bentham, proposed a happiness calculus that can be used to more rigorously apply utilitarian philosophy to decision-making. Using a happiness calculus presumably quantifies the amount of happiness that might result from performing or not performing a certain action. The happiness calculus also shows that the theory of utilitarianism can be applied conversely: an act is ethical if it minimizes pain for the maximum number of people, or causes the least pain for the least number of people. Pleasure and pain can theoretically be quantified in terms of intensity, duration, likeliness of the desired results, and also fruitfulness or meaningfulness (p. 59). The latter concept, fruitfulness, implies...

The fleeting happiness that comes from eating ice cream is less fruitful than the longer lasting happiness of being healthy.
Bentham, Mill, and other proponents of utilitarianism also distinguish between the quality of pleasure and the quantity of pleasure. All aspects of happiness can potentially be quantified or measured, including fruitfulness. Thus, happiness can be quantified in terms of its duration, how many people are happy, or how likely the outcome is to occur. The quality of happiness is far more subjective; but from Mill's point-of-view, intellectual pleasures are superior to the pleasures of the flesh. The pleasure of solving a problem is qualitatively better than the pleasure gained from watching a sitcom.

Utilitarianism can be loosely divided into rule-based utilitarianism and act utilitarianism. Rule utilitarianism allows for broader ethical codes based on certain rules of behavior. Act utilitarianism uses situational constraints to show that individual acts should be judged on their own merits, and that each situation needs to be judged individually.

Reflection

While the happiness calculus is certainly not scientific, utilitarianism itself remains one of the most relevant and effective tools for ethical decision-making. Utilitarianism coincides with libertarianism and the empowerment of the individual to make decisions without ascribing to some absolute moral code of behavior. Utilitarianism also liberates the individual from the senselessness of total selfishness, as acting in self-interest rarely produces a net positive outcome given the social nature of human existence. There are some problems with utilitarianism with regard to how happiness can be measured, and also with regard to the fact that the greatest good for the greatest number of people tends to neglect that small minority of those who will not benefit from the action. In the real world, though, no act can please every person a hundred percent of the time. Moreover, utilitarianism can be misused. As a consequentialist theory, utilitarianism can suggest for example that the "ends justifies the means," (p. 61). If misused, utilitarianism could justify heinous acts committed against a minority of people in order to serve the best interests of a majority. Nevertheless, utilitarianism provides a meaningful and effective framework for good judgment.

2.…