Act Utilitarianism Analysis

Utilitarianism is the theory that an act is morally right so long as the act is useful or provides benefits. There are two distinct types of utilitarianism: act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism states that an act is morally right if it produces the best possible results in a particular circumstance over the other possible choice of action. Rule utilitarianism is a type of utilitarianism which states that an act is morally right if and only if it is accepted as a morally right act by society/societal standards (through the maximum utility) more so than any other alternative. Hedonistic utilitarianism, sometimes deemed as “true” or “general” utilitarianism, is the theory that happiness/pleasure is the sole good and pain …show more content…
Pojman, has strengths and weaknesses (particularly in hedonistic utilitarianism), and it is evident that Pojman is a supporter of utilitarianism through his arguments. Beginning with the arguments against utilitarianism, people argue that utilitarianism calls for personal sacrifice to benefit the greater good. Pojman counters this by speaking on the idea that the greater good includes oneself, thus indicating that an act must overall be beneficial to everyone (including oneself), but he does not touch upon another argument against utilitarianism, which is the argument that there are infinite amounts of acts and it would be impossible to determine which act would be more beneficial overall. Pojman argues that utilitarianism works because it gets to the root of the morality issue, seeing as the promotion of good and minimization of evil is central to hedonistic utilitarianism. He even goes so far as to say that utilitarianism can be considered to be an absolute system that seems to have a solution for almost every circumstance, which is to complete the act that provides a benefit for the greater good. Even further, Pojman brings up the idea that utilitarianism also addresses the issue of posterity, such as why people in the present should concern ourselves with the people of the future, among other …show more content…
However, it seems to be that Pojman more so believes in determinism and rule utilitarianism, and Ismael more so believes in free will and act utilitarianism. I agree with Ismael, in that I believe that we are in fact able to freely determine the greater good, through the existence of free will, act utilitarianism, and the accountability of our