What is Utilitarianism, how do Bentham and Mill differ, and how well does the greatest happiness principle work as a guide to action?
Utilitarianism: Bentham's act utilitarianism and the hedonic calculus, Mill's qualitative higher and lower pleasures and rule utilitarianism, the greatest happiness principle, and strengths and weaknesses of the theory.
A CCEA AS 7 guide to Utilitarianism. Covers Bentham's act utilitarianism and the hedonic calculus, Mill's distinction between higher and lower pleasures and his rule utilitarianism, the greatest happiness principle, the act and rule versions, and the main strengths and weaknesses of the theory.
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
You need to explain Utilitarianism, contrasting Jeremy Bentham's act utilitarianism and hedonic calculus with John Stuart Mill's qualitative distinction between higher and lower pleasures and his move towards rule utilitarianism, set out the greatest happiness principle, and then evaluate the theory's strengths and weaknesses. This is the third normative theory in AS 7 and the only one that is secular, consequentialist and explicitly about maximising happiness.
Bentham: act utilitarianism and the hedonic calculus
To calculate the right act, Bentham proposed the hedonic (or felicific) calculus, which weighs the pleasure produced by seven factors: intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity (nearness in time), fecundity (likelihood of leading to more pleasure), purity (freedom from pain) and extent (how many people are affected). The act with the highest net balance of pleasure is the right one. Because it weighs everyone's pleasure equally, the calculus is democratic and impartial.
Mill: higher and lower pleasures, and rule utilitarianism
Mill's harm principle, that people should be free to act as they wish so long as they do not harm others, gives his utilitarianism a strongly liberal, rights-protecting character that Bentham's lacks.
Act versus rule utilitarianism
The distinction matters for evaluation.
- Act utilitarianism assesses each act on its own, which is flexible but can justify breaking ordinary moral rules whenever doing so maximises happiness in the instance, exposing it to objections about lying, punishing the innocent or sacrificing minorities.
- Rule utilitarianism assesses acts by rules ("keep promises", "do not punish the innocent") chosen because they generally maximise happiness. This better protects rights and trust, but a "strong" rule utilitarianism that never breaks a rule can collapse into the rigidity it was meant to avoid.
Strengths and weaknesses
A model evaluation paragraph might run: "Utilitarianism's strengths are considerable: it is secular and rational, requiring no religious premises; it is democratic, counting everyone's happiness equally and aiming at the common good; and it is flexible, able to respond to consequences case by case. Yet its weaknesses are equally pressing. It is difficult, perhaps impossible, to predict and measure future happiness accurately, which makes the calculus unworkable in practice; in its act form it can justify acts that violate justice, such as punishing an innocent person to satisfy a mob, because it counts only aggregate happiness; and it can sacrifice the individual or the minority to the majority, the so-called tyranny of the majority. The judgement, therefore, is that Utilitarianism offers a powerful and humane account of why consequences matter, but that act utilitarianism's neglect of justice and rights is a serious flaw, partly though not wholly answered by Mill's qualitative and rule-based refinements."
Try this
Q1. State the greatest happiness principle. [2 marks]
- Cue. The right action is the one that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number.
Q2. Explain Mill's distinction between higher and lower pleasures. [6 marks]
- Cue. Higher pleasures are intellectual and moral, lower pleasures are bodily; competent judges who know both prefer the higher, so quality matters as well as quantity.
Q3. "Rule utilitarianism is an improvement on act utilitarianism." Discuss. [12 marks]
- Cue. Weigh rule utilitarianism's protection of rights and trust against the charge that strong rule utilitarianism becomes rigid and weak rule utilitarianism collapses back into act utilitarianism. Reach a judgement.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of CCEA exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
CCEA AS 7 201712 marksExplain the differences between Bentham's and Mill's versions of Utilitarianism.Show worked answer →
An AO1 question, so reward accurate exposition of both thinkers and the
contrast between them.
Bentham. Explain act utilitarianism, the greatest happiness principle, and
the hedonic calculus, by which the rightness of each act is calculated from
the quantity of pleasure it produces using factors such as intensity,
duration and certainty. Bentham treats all pleasures as equal in kind.
Mill. Explain that Mill introduces a qualitative distinction between higher
pleasures (intellectual and moral) and lower pleasures (bodily), holding
that it is "better to be a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied", and
moves towards rule utilitarianism, judging acts by rules that generally
maximise happiness.
The contrast. A strong answer makes the differences explicit: quantity
versus quality, and act versus a more rule-based approach. Accurate detail
reaches the top band.
CCEA AS 7 202012 marksComment on the view that Utilitarianism cannot protect the rights of the individual.Show worked answer →
An AO2 evaluation question, so build both sides and judge.
Supporting the claim. Because the theory aims at the greatest good for the
greatest number, the interests of a minority or an individual can be
sacrificed for the majority, as in the "tyranny of the majority" or the
scapegoat objection.
Challenging the claim. Rule utilitarianism can protect rights through rules
that generally maximise happiness, and Mill's harm principle defends
individual liberty.
A judgement that act utilitarianism is genuinely vulnerable to the
objection while rule and Mill's liberal versions answer it better reaches
the higher bands.
Related dot points
- Natural Moral Law: the foundations in Aristotle and Aquinas, the primary and secondary precepts, the four tiers of law, real and apparent goods, the doctrine of double effect, and strengths and weaknesses of the theory.
A CCEA AS 7 guide to Natural Moral Law. Covers the roots in Aristotle and Aquinas, the five primary precepts and the secondary precepts derived from them, the four tiers of law, real and apparent goods, the doctrine of double effect, and the main strengths and weaknesses of the theory.
- Situation Ethics: Fletcher's agape principle, the four working principles, the six fundamental principles, the rejection of legalism and antinomianism, and strengths and weaknesses of the theory.
A CCEA AS 7 guide to Situation Ethics. Covers Joseph Fletcher's agape principle, the four working principles and the six fundamental principles, the middle way between legalism and antinomianism, the place of conscience, and the main strengths and weaknesses of the theory.
- The relationship between religion and morality: divine command theory, the Euthyphro dilemma, the autonomy and heteronomy of ethics, conscience, and whether morality depends on God.
A CCEA AS 7 guide to the relationship between religion and morality. Covers divine command theory, the Euthyphro dilemma, the autonomy and heteronomy of ethics, the role of conscience, and the debate over whether morality depends on God or can stand independently of religion.
- Issues in medical ethics: the sanctity and quality of life, personhood and viability, abortion, euthanasia and the right to die, and the application of Natural Moral Law, Situation Ethics and Utilitarianism to these issues.
A CCEA AS 7 guide to issues in medical ethics. Covers the sanctity and quality of life debate, personhood and viability, abortion and euthanasia, and how Natural Moral Law, Situation Ethics and Utilitarianism are applied to each issue, with the arguments these theories generate.
Sources & how we know this
- CCEA GCE Religious Studies (2016) specification — CCEA (2016)