Act Utilitarianism Case Study

Throughout the course of this paper I will provide a brief introduction to act utilitarianism, use a case to describe how an act utilitarian would make a decision, and then offer my opinion on the case.
Consequentialism argues that moral rights and wrongs should be judged not on actions, rather on the consequences of said actions. Act utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism where the rightness of an action is determined by if that action will bring about the most overall happiness. It is important to understand that in this theory everyone’s happiness counts equally; no one person is more or less important than anyone else. To determine the proper course of action, one should put themselves in the role of an unbiased person. They should …show more content…
First, we must assume the man the authorities have is without a doubt the criminal who planted the bombs. Second, we must assume that the officials would have enough time to get the information from him, locate the bombs, and remove the threat. Third, it must be assumed that no other options, such as evacuation, are available. Lastly, we must assume that the criminal would tell the truth in the case of torture of him or his wife. Without any of these assumptions, it would be difficult to determine what would happen in any situation. Now, we are to take the role of an impartial bystander and look at all possible outcomes. With this case, there appears to be four possible outcomes. One: the officials decide against torture, the bombs are not located, and they go off, killing hundreds of innocent people. Two: the officials decide to torture the man, but he does not reveal the location, again leading to the bombs exploding. Three: the officials proceed in his torture, and he reveals the location of the bombs, they are able to safely remove them and provide safety to the crowded areas. Four: the officials decide that torturing his wife is the best course of action, he gives the information, and again safety is achieved. Next, we must decide which of these options will bring about the most overall happiness. Options one and two end in the deaths of hundreds. This would lead to the unhappiness of all of the deceased friends and families. The officials would have to live with the guilt of not doing everything they could have to ensure the safety of those areas. The only people benefitting from outcome one are the bomber and his family. Nobody gains happiness from outcome two. Even though the bombs go off, the bomber would not feel much joy from it considering he’d been tortured. Options three and four end with safety for everyone in the crowded areas. Their safety ensures that they will have future opportunities for happiness.