Act Utilitarianism is that moral theory discussed previously in which a single decision is considered morally right on the grounds that a morally right decision will promote the most universal happiness. Rule Utilitarianism judges the morality of a set of rules, then holding that a decision that is derived from that predetermined set of rules that promotes the most overall happiness as any other alternative is the morally right decision. Because this set of rules that increases happiness most is adopted beforehand according to Rule Utilitarianism, the implication of the impossibility of accurately judging every possible decision and its corresponding effect on happiness is …show more content…
It is also undoubtfully nearly impossible for an individual to judge the moral consequences of an action as relating to every person said action will affect. This inability can be attributed to humans’ lacking quality of omniscience. However, I do agree with the stance on morality of Rule Utilitarianism. Rule Utilitarianism eliminates the immense amount of pressure placed on humans by Act Utilitarianism. The inherent nature of man is selfish: children must be taught to share and consider the feelings of others; they must be taught to be self-aware. This is because of an evolutionary concept: man, in his natural state, thinks of his own needs first. Rule Utilitarianism then permits for this disposition in that it provides a set of rules that is determined before any situations arise. This allows one to be fully aware of the decision which is morally right. A morally wrong decision can then not be attributed to misinformation or lack of omniscience as may be the case with Act Utilitarianism. I do think that Rule Utilitarianism adequately addresses all moral factors. Despite discrepancies between Act and Rule Utilitarianism, Utilitarianism continues to be a renowned moral theory, widely