An example of when Act Utilitarianism could be used to decide the best course of action would be in a group of people choosing what topping to order on their pizza. If, for example, 3 out of the four people wanted pepperoni but the fourth person wanted ham, it only seems logical to order pepperoni. This is because the collective pleasure or happiness to be had by the first three outweighs the possible unhappiness, or possibly pain, of the fourth person. This is applying what we call the ‘greatest happiness for the greatest number’ principle. If ham was ordered, then three out of four people would feel the unhappiness or pain that would only otherwise be felt by one person, and so the collective pain is tripled if ham is ordered. Should pepperoni be ordered, only one person suffers. The application of the ‘greatest happiness for the greatest number’ principle works perfectly here, as it is clear how it would be better overall to follow Bentham’s course of action, as the alternative causes greater unhappiness. To apply Bentham’s theory to the letter, what we would do is utilise the Hedonic Calculus. We would decide on the intensity, duration, certainty, remoteness, fecundity and extent of each course of action and then choose the course which should, in theory, give the greatest happiness to the greatest number. On matters such as this, Act Utilitarianism and the Hedonic Calculus do seem to be the best course of action to follow, but perhaps on more serious matters the case may not be the same.
Immediately we go into darker territory when giving an example of when Act Utilitarianism would not be the best course of action to follow, as it is only really on more sinister issues that Bentham’s theory falls down. Consider gang rape. Applying Bentham’s ‘greatest happiness for the greatest number’ principle and the Hedonic Calculus would lead us to the conclusion that if Act Utilitarianism was used to decide whether or not gang rape was morally justifiable, it would be. This is because the suffering to be had by the one victim of the gang rape is overpowered by the pleasure to be had by the rapists, simply because there are more of them. We are led to this conclusion when there is a sufficient number of rapists, as it comes down to the ‘greatest number’ part of the ‘greatest happiness’ principle, but if, for example, there were only 2 rapists, as opposed to a possible 5 or 6, we can assume that the enormous amount of unhappiness and pain to be had by the victim would outweigh the relatively short-lived happiness or pleasure to be had by the rapists. Though it would depend on the specific circumstance, generally we would arrive at the conclusion that Bentham would say gang rape is morally justifiable. Though in Bentham’s complete theory of social, political and legal reform this sort of issue is dealt with, by applying Act Utilitarianism on its own, we cannot generally say Act Utilitarianism is always the best course of action to follow.
To summarise, we can say that Act Utilitarianism can be used to decide the best course of action when it comes to what can be called simple or basic pleasures, for example the pizza topping, as the ultimate consequence of following the Hedonic Calculus is never, or at least is rarely, sufficient enough to constitute not doing so. On the other hand, when we consider actions such as gang rape or torture, the Hedonic Calculus would generally have us encourage the action, although it can be argued that this is taking Act Utilitarianism out of context, and that any ethical theory only works when applied as a whole. To conclude, Jeremy Bentham’s version of Utilitarianism can be used to decide the best course of action when it is applied to issues which do not generally have dire or particularly painful consequences. It may also be equally applicable when applying Bentham’s entire theory of justice, though the supposed action in theory can never be certified to be the same as the resultant action in reality, so we can never be sure as to whether or not Act Utilitarianism in its entirety would always be used to decide the best course of action.
