Case Study: Rule Utilitarianism or Act Utilitarianism?

This paper analyzes the procedure that were followed that it is a typical sight to see on the street, children and often old, physically handicapped, beggars and sickly people pleading for food and some cash. It critically analyzes these procedures in the moral problem with recommendation of using the concepts: guideline and act utilitarianism. Should we provide these beggars cash or not? In deciding whether we offer or not, the answer for that is we ought to give. Why? Act utilitarianism essentially states that an action is ethical if it produces the greatest joy for the most individuals.

This factor alone the act of providing would be an excellent idea, because it would benefit the most amount of people. At a first glimpse in the issue, by just wishing them to just go away, ignoring and disappear from our sight is straight unethical. You're giving them discomfort in spite of the guideline of greatest joy and enjoyment - utilitarianism. Nevertheless in the contrary it is actually ideal that by giving it motivates them to end up being lazy and to be dependent on us, but what we are looking here is our act how we react to them.

Get quality help now

Prof. Finch

Verified writer

Proficient in: Case Study

4.7 (346)

“ This writer never make an mistake for me always deliver long before due date. Am telling you man this writer is absolutely the best. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

That is our centerpiece providing them or not providing by the prospect of utilitarianism in which we must act in such way that our actions produce the best happiness or pleasure. Whatever will be the repercussions on how they used the cash ran out that. If we show off of the act utilitarianism it is everything about happiness the enjoyment that is produced by the action.

If we don't provide them even the smallest quantity of money, we feel guilty and there is no satisfaction. Here is that we will be seen and evaluated as being moral through our actions.

With this case, it was specified that is it not true that these individuals need the cash more than we do, right here and right now? The reality is it is truly true that they require the cash more than we do due to the fact that why would they be asking money if they didn't require it? And see? The impact of providing them is satisfaction. In terms of my own sensations, using the act utilitarianism is the better option with regards to the issue of this case than guideline utilitarianism. Focusing on how we act, what are our actions, and particularly the importance of the act of providing.

In rule utilitarianism, we all have different rules on what we do. For example, the rules that govern my action are really not to give them money because of believing that it encourages them to be lazy and dependent. For me, it is a pleasure. But let’s try to think about others? The majority? Where is now the happiness for the most amount of people? That’s why act utilitarianism for me is the better option. It enables me to provide a strong foundation in this problem. Finally, no matter what really is the right concept here in this particular dilemma, all things that work for good are morally right.