What is the key difference between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism?

What is the key difference between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism?

• A. Act utilitarianism evaluates the consequences of each act; rule utilitarianism evaluates actions by conformity to rules with the best consequences.
• B. Act utilitarianism rejects any consideration of happiness.
• C. Rule utilitarianism is identical to Kantian ethics.
• D. Act utilitarianism focuses only on intentions.

Answer: (A)

The main idea being tested is how the judging of right actions differs between evaluating each act versus evaluating the rules we follow. Act utilitarianism looks at the consequences of a specific action in a given moment and chooses the act that maximizes overall happiness in that situation. Rule utilitarianism, on the other hand, assesses actions by whether they conform to a rule that, if followed generally, would lead to the greatest happiness overall. This means a particular act that seems to produce good results might be rejected by rule utilitarianism if it would undermine a beneficial rule if followed widely. For example, lying to save a life could be justified by act utilitarianism because the outcomes are better in that instance, but rule utilitarianism would oppose lying because the rule against lying tends to produce better consequences when applied broadly, preserving trust and social cooperation. Both forms center happiness as the moral aim, but they differ in whether we evaluate the act itself or the rule behind the act.

The main idea being tested is how the judging of right actions differs between evaluating each act versus evaluating the rules we follow. Act utilitarianism looks at the consequences of a specific action in a given moment and chooses the act that maximizes overall happiness in that situation. Rule utilitarianism, on the other hand, assesses actions by whether they conform to a rule that, if followed generally, would lead to the greatest happiness overall. This means a particular act that seems to produce good results might be rejected by rule utilitarianism if it would undermine a beneficial rule if followed widely. For example, lying to save a life could be justified by act utilitarianism because the outcomes are better in that instance, but rule utilitarianism would oppose lying because the rule against lying tends to produce better consequences when applied broadly, preserving trust and social cooperation. Both forms center happiness as the moral aim, but they differ in whether we evaluate the act itself or the rule behind the act.