TO WHAT EXTENT MAY UTILITARIANISM BE CONSIDERED INADEQUATE AS A MEANS OF SOLVING MORAL DILEMNAS?

Secondly, is the fact that J.S.Mill put the decision of considering whether an action is good or bad in the hands of those he termed competent judges. These were those who were intellectually capable experiencing lower and higher pleasures of the mind. He believed that this competent judge would have chosen the higher pleasures. This may be of his own opinion because he was an upper class, highly respected, intelligent, Victorian gentleman and practised a lot of social differentiation, which may have been of great influence in his principle. In his times, some actions might have been considered of higher pleasure to those so-called competent judges and might have been morally wrong. For example, public execution, which was absolutely acceptable in those years but truly barbaric.  

Also, utilitarianism does not consider the major responsibilities of people but only allows actions that will bring happiness for the majority. This is because Jeremy Bentham and his disciple considered all actions to be neutral and should not be considered right or wrong unless it brings happiness for the greater number even if it was at the expense of an individual. For example, if a person is on a ship with his father and a scientist who is planning on sealing the hole in the ozone layer to the advantage of all humans and the ship is sinking due to heavy weight, utilitarianism supports that your father should be thrown off because the scientist will bring about the greatest good for the greater number.  

Furthermore, another main inadequacy is injustice. Utilitarianism provides no objective and consistent foundation to judge results because results are the mechanism used to judge actions itself. If the execution of an innocent person will make the majority abstain from committing crimes then it should be morally right to prevent the majority from doing the same.

The last main inadequacy is self-sacrifice. Utilitarianism implies the happiness of others even at your expense. For example, if for a reason, your death will bring about happiness for the majority, then it is considered right to kill yourself, which is usually unacceptable, by humans.