Case Study: Rule Utilitarianism or Act Utilitarianism? Essay

This paper examines the procedure that were followed that it is a common sight to see on the street, children and sometimes old, physic on the wholey handicapped, beggars and sickly mountain begging for food and some bullion. It critically examines these procedures in the acceptable dilemma with address of applying the concepts rule and act as utilitarianism. Should we give these beggars property or not? In deciding whether we give or not, the answer for that is we should give. why? Act utilitarianism basically states that an action is moral if it produces the greatest gladness for the close community.This origin alone the act of free them would be a good idea, because it would benefit the most amount of mountain. At a prime(prenominal) glance in the problem, by right handeous wishing them to just go away, ignoring and melt down from our sight is directly immoral. Youre giving them pain despite the rule of greatest happiness and pleasure utilitarianism. However in t he contrary it is real right that by giving it encourages them to become lazy and to be dependent on us, but what we be looking here is our act how we reply to them.That is our focal point giving them or not giving them by the break through with(predicate)look of utilitarianism in which we should act in such way that our actions produce the greatest happiness or pleasure. Whatever will be the consequences on how they used the money were out of that. If we reflect off of the act utilitarianism it is all about happiness the pleasure that is produced by the action. If we dont give them stock-still the smallest amount of money, we feel guilty and on that point is no pleasure. Here is that we will be viewed and judged as being moral through our actions.With this consequence, it was stated that is it not true that these people accept the money more than we do, right here and right at one time? The the true is it is really true that they need the money more than we do because why would they be asking money if they didnt need it? And see? The effect of giving them is pleasure. In terms of my own feelings, using the act utilitarianism is the go against option with regards to the problem of this case than rule utilitarianism. Focusing on how we act, what argon our actions, and especially the importance of the act of giving.In rule utilitarianism, we all have dissimilar rules on what we do. For example, the rules that govern my action atomic number 18 really not to give them money because of believing that it encourages them to be lazy and dependent. For me, it is a pleasure. But lets stress to think about others? The majority? Where is now the happiness for the most amount of people? Thats why act utilitarianism for me is the better option. It enables me to provide a strong footing in this problem. Finally, no matter what really is the right concept here in this particular dilemma, all things that work for good are morally right.