Explain the difference between Act and rule utilitarianism

Act utilitarianism does not act on moral rules, the theory allows people to make their own decisions, however the decision should be based on the consequence that the action would produce. The outcome must bring out the 'Greatest good for the greatest number.' Thus cannot be for one person alone as an act utilitarianism aim to bring out the maximum amount of good and least amount of pain. For example, in Act utilitarianism a group of people may be on their way to the cinema, however may come across a lady asking to give money for charity, according to act utilitarianism the people would therefore have to give up there cinema money and give it to charity instead, this is done because it would cause the maximum amount of good, as the charity would help a lot of people, and the least amount of pain as they would not be able to have money to go to the cinema, however over the next following weeks the people may be going cinema and keep having to give to charity as they always see the lady on the way, therefore the group of friends would be missing out some good time, and would be disadvantage for them as they can’t spent good time watching cinema but will cause maximum amount of good. In contrast a rule utilitarian would not persistently give up their money for charity each time because according to Rule utilitarianism the one should make leisure time for himself instead constantly giving money to charity which make maximum amount of good for the greatest number.

Another example of Act and Rule Utilitarianism is; pregnant women in the back seat of the car, about to deliver. Water has broken. Contractions are 2 minutes apart. It is 4 am. The vehicle is 2 miles from the hospital. There are no other cars around. According to Act utilitarianism we should break the law and go through that red light as there is a pregnant woman in the back seat of car about to deliver, it would produce more utility than not doing so. But according to Rule utilitarianism we should not break the law by passing red light because if a rule cannot bring a greater good, breaking it will not either.

Rule utilitarianism has some advantages over act utilitarianism. Rule utilitarianism can provide real guidance for making moral decisions, that deciding according act utilitarianism will breakdown our trust that people behave morally. So following a rule even when in the particular case it will cause less happiness than breaking the rule, is still justified, because if people kept breaking the rules, that would cause less happiness in the long run. For example, If a doctor knows that his patient going to die in few months, according to Act utilitarianism the doctor must lie to his patient because if he does so it will make greater happiness for greater number of people but according to Rule utilitarianism doctor should tell truth to his patient about his condition even if makes less happiness for majority because according to Rule utilitarianism breaking the rule will not bring happiness either and might affect in the long run. i.e people will lose their trust from their doctors.

Conclusion

Act utilitarianism is the belief that an action becomes morally right when it produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people, while Rule utilitarianism is the belief that the moral correctness of an action depends on the correctness of the rules that allows it to achieve the greatest good. Act utilitarianism is the belief that it is alright to break a rule as long as it brings a greater good, while Rule utilitarianism is a belief that even if a rule cannot bring a greater good, breaking it will not either.