Does utilitarianism, by judging acts on the happiness they produce, give a sound moral theory, or do the calculation, the tyranny of the majority and the neglect of justice undermine it?
Component 02 Utilitarianism: Bentham's hedonic calculus, Mill's higher and lower pleasures and harm principle, and the contrast between act and rule utilitarianism, with strengths and weaknesses.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to utilitarianism. Covers Bentham's principle of utility and hedonic calculus, Mill's qualitative distinction between higher and lower pleasures, the contrast between act and rule utilitarianism, and the strengths and weaknesses (calculation, the tyranny of the majority, justice) the exam asks you to evaluate.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
OCR Component 02 sets utilitarianism as a teleological and consequentialist theory: the right action is the one that produces the best consequences, measured as happiness or pleasure. You study Bentham's principle of utility and hedonic calculus, Mill's refinement into higher and lower pleasures (and his harm principle), and the distinction between act and rule utilitarianism. The exam rewards explaining each version precisely and then evaluating whether maximising happiness is an adequate basis for morality.
The answer
Bentham: the principle of utility and the hedonic calculus
Mill: higher and lower pleasures
Mill's harm principle
Act and rule utilitarianism
Strengths and weaknesses
- Strengths: democratic (everyone counts for one), impartial, secular and clearly consequence-sensitive; it matches the everyday thought that suffering matters.
- Weaknesses: consequences are hard to predict and calculate; it can justify injustice (framing or punishing an innocent person to satisfy the majority); it neglects special obligations (to family, promises) and individual rights, allowing the tyranny of the majority.
Examples in context
Try this
Q1. "Utilitarianism cannot protect the rights of the individual." Discuss. [40 marks]
- What the marker wants. An AO2 essay weighing the tyranny-of-the-majority and innocent-punishment objections against rule utilitarianism and Mill's harm principle, judging whether the theory secures justice. AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15.
Q2. Assess whether Mill's distinction between higher and lower pleasures improves Bentham's theory. [40 marks]
- Cue. Mill's qualitative ranking answers the "swine" objection but raises the problem of who the competent judges are and whether quality can be measured. Weigh the gain against the new difficulties and judge.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of OCR exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
OCR H573/02 2018 (style)20 marksAssess whether utilitarianism is the best approach to making moral decisions. (The full OCR tariff for this essay is 40 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.)Show worked answer →
A 40-mark Component 02 essay on the six-level scheme (AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15). Explaining the theory earns AO1; the higher levels reward judging whether it is the best approach.
Explain (AO1). Bentham's principle of utility seeks the greatest happiness of the greatest number, measured by the hedonic calculus (intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity, extent). Mill answers the "swine" objection by ranking higher (intellectual) above lower (bodily) pleasures. Act utilitarianism judges each act; rule utilitarianism follows rules that generally maximise happiness.
Evaluate (AO2). Strengths: democratic, impartial, consequence-sensitive, secular. Weaknesses: consequences are hard to calculate; it can justify injustice (punishing the innocent for majority happiness); it ignores special obligations and individual rights.
Judge. A top answer decides whether maximising happiness captures morality or sacrifices justice, and defends the verdict.
OCR H573/02 2021 (style)20 marksCritically assess the difference between act and rule utilitarianism. (The full OCR tariff for this essay is 40 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.)Show worked answer →
A levels-of-response essay testing AO1 understanding of the two forms and AO2 evaluation of them.
Explain. Act utilitarianism (closer to Bentham) judges each individual act by the happiness it produces, allowing rules to be broken whenever doing so maximises utility. Rule utilitarianism (closer to Mill) follows rules whose general adoption maximises happiness, giving more stable, predictable guidance and protecting against one-off injustices.
Evaluate. Act is flexible but can justify harming an individual for the greater good and is hard to calculate each time. Rule protects rights and is workable but can collapse into act utilitarianism if rules are made flexible, or become rigid if they are not.
Judge. A high-level answer weighs whether either form escapes the injustice objection, and reaches a justified conclusion.
Related dot points
- Component 02 Kantian ethics: the good will and duty, the categorical imperative and its three formulations (universal law, ends in themselves, kingdom of ends), and the summum bonum, with strengths and weaknesses.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to Kantian ethics. Covers the good will and acting from duty, the categorical imperative and its three formulations (universal law, ends in themselves, the kingdom of ends), and the summum bonum with the postulates of freedom, immortality and God, plus the strengths, weaknesses and AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 02 Natural law: Aquinas's four tiers of law, the primary and secondary precepts, real and apparent goods, and the doctrine of double effect, with strengths and weaknesses as an ethical theory.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to natural law. Covers Aquinas's four tiers of law, the five primary precepts and the secondary precepts derived from them, real and apparent goods, and the doctrine of double effect, with the strengths and weaknesses and the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 02 Situation ethics: Fletcher's agape, the four working principles (pragmatism, relativism, positivism, personalism) and the six fundamental principles, with strengths and weaknesses as an ethical theory.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to situation ethics. Covers Fletcher's principle of agape, the four working principles (pragmatism, relativism, positivism, personalism) and the six fundamental principles, with the strengths, weaknesses and AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 02 Applied ethics (euthanasia): the sanctity of life and quality of life principles, voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia, and the application of natural law and situation ethics to end-of-life decisions.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to euthanasia. Covers the sanctity of life and quality of life principles, voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia, the active/passive distinction, and how natural law, situation ethics and utilitarianism apply to end-of-life decisions, with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 02 Applied ethics (business ethics): corporate social responsibility, globalisation and whistleblowing, Friedman's shareholder view, and the application of Kantian ethics and utilitarianism to business.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to business ethics. Covers corporate social responsibility, globalisation and whistleblowing, Friedman's view that the social responsibility of business is to increase profits, the stakeholder alternative, and how Kantian ethics and utilitarianism apply to business, with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
Sources & how we know this
- OCR A Level Religious Studies (H573) specification — OCR (2016)
- John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism — Project Gutenberg (1863)