Both rule utilitarianism and act utilitarianism adhere to the utility principle, but differ on the best wayto achieve its aims. They both seek to judge action ‘according to the tendency which it appears tohave to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question’. Actutilitarianism thinks that the best way to achieve the greatest happiness is to concentrate on individualactions. Jeremey BEnthem provided a utility calculus, which measures the likely intensity, duration,fecundity, purity, certainty, extent, and propinquity of the pleasures which a certain action wouldproduce. Thus, before one embarks upon any course of action, the total happiness that action wouldcreate must be calculated to ensure that it is creating more happiness than any other action.In contrast, rule utilitarianism argues that the greatest amount of happiness would be produce if wefollowed a set of rules which aimed to maximise happiness. Thus an action is right if it complies withthose rules which , if everybody followed them, would lead to the greatest happiness (compared toany other set of rules). Rule utilitarians object that the felific calculus is, in practice, mind boggling.Instead, we don’t need to consider the happiness of each specific action but just ensure that ourbehaviour accords with those rules agreed to create the most happinesss.
