According to Sober, "Utilitarianism is an ethical theory whose central idea is ‘the greatest good for the greatest number’" (Sober 430). Utilitarianism rose in opposition to the idea that the upper crust of society had the right to arrange the rules of society as they saw fit. The concern of Utilitarianism is the most good for the most people, not the most good for the people that "matter." From this standpoint, Utilitarianism appears to be an attractive ethical theory. However, there are many philosophers who criticize Utilitarianism. They argue that the apparently simple premise of Utilitarianism has many complex problems behind it. For example, what is happiness? How can we ensure the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people? And what happens if acting for the greatest good for the greatest number leads to injustice? I believe that a specific variation of Utilitarianism – Rule Utilitarianism -- can adequately address these problems, and it is therefore the most plausible ethical theory.Rule Utilitarianism is derived from the basic Utilitarian principle of the greatest good for the greatest number. However, where Act Utilitarianism addresses each individual action or situation in reference to this principle, Rule Utilitarianism states that we must use the Utilitarian principle to define the rules that regulate society. Many of the rules of modern society have derived in this manner. For example, it would not benefit the most people if murder were allowed by society. No matter how beneficial a murder might be for one individual, society would not benefit from murder being allowed, and therefore Rule Utilitarianism supports the idea that murder is wrong. However, society does benefit from murdering people who are dangerous to society – those who murder other people. Therefore, Rule Utilitarianism can also be used to support the idea of capital punishment, even as it opposes murder. R...
