Utilitarianism: Happiness, Impartiality, and Equality

How to Evaluate the Consequences of an Act?

Only by the amount of happiness or "the opposite of happiness" they produce. Mill clarified that the consequences have not been evaluated with respect to an act but respect for the rule in which this event is significant.

Who Does Utilitarianism Affect?

In principle, all beings capable of suffering (and that includes non-human animals) are subject to morality according to utilitarianism. This includes a consideration of equal rights for everyone, sometimes described as a principle of impartiality.

What is "Fair"?

Impartiality means the happiness of each person involved in a truly moral decision counts equally. In other words, "everyone goes for one and only one." According to Mill: "The happiness which forms the utilitarian criterion of what is correct behavior is not the agent's own happiness, but to all concerned. Between personal happiness and the agent of others, utilitarianism requires this to be as strictly impartial as a disinterested and benevolent spectator."

Impartiality does not necessarily mean "equal" because different situations cannot be handled equally.

Is Utilitarianism Egalitarian?

As everyone is different in their preferences, in their model of happiness, etc., utilitarianism considers the equality of results is harmful to happiness and promotes, instead, equal opportunities. Everyone should have the right to fairly explore the wider field of possibilities, but equal opportunity does not guarantee equality end.

An example of equal opportunity can be a class: everyone has an equal chance to exploit it, everyone hears the same from the same teacher, but then defend better or worse on the exam.

Prohibiting Utilitarianism?

Bentham was a scholar of law and utilitarian theory has a strong legal sense. The principle of utility was prepared as a guide to legislation or public opinion. Accordingly, since the intent of the law is to promote the welfare of citizens, we prohibit the minimum and do not in any way restrict the freedom of choice beyond what is necessary.

Therefore, as set in Mill's On Liberty: "The only purpose for which power can, with full rights, to be played on a member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent the harm others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient justification [...] About himself, about his own body and spirit, the individual is sovereign."