Act Consequentialism vs. Rule Consequentialism

Attribute	Act Consequentialism	Rule Consequentialism
Focus	Individual actions	General rules
Evaluation	Each action is evaluated separately	Actions are evaluated based on adherence to rules
Flexibility	More flexible in decision-making	Less flexible due to adherence to rules
Moral Intuition	Relies on moral intuition for decision-making	Relies on established rules for decision-making

Definition

Act consequentialism and rule consequentialism are two prominent ethical theories that fall under the broader category of consequentialism. Consequentialism is the belief that the morality of an action is determined by its outcome or consequence. Both act and rule consequentialism focus on maximizing the overall good, but they differ in their approach to achieving this goal.

Act Consequentialism

Act consequentialism, also known as direct consequentialism, evaluates the morality of individual actions based on their specific consequences. This means that in any given situation, the morally right action is the one that produces the best overall outcome. Proponents of act consequentialism argue that it allows for flexibility and adaptability in decision-making, as it prioritizes the immediate consequences of each action.

• Focuses on the specific consequences of individual actions
• Allows for flexibility and adaptability in decision-making
• Emphasizes the importance of maximizing overall good in each situation
• Does not rely on predetermined rules or principles
• Can lead to morally questionable actions if the consequences are not carefully considered

Rule Consequentialism

Rule consequentialism, on the other hand, evaluates the morality of actions based on the consequences of following a set of rules or principles. Instead of focusing on the specific consequences of each individual action, rule consequentialism looks at the overall consequences of following a particular rule in a given situation. Proponents of rule consequentialism argue that it provides a more stable and consistent moral framework, as it relies on general rules that have been determined to produce the best outcomes in the long run.

• Focuses on the consequences of following a set of rules or principles
• Provides a stable and consistent moral framework
• Relies on general rules that have been determined to maximize overall good
• Allows for predictability in decision-making
• May lead to situations where following a rule produces negative consequences in a specific case

Comparison

While both act consequentialism and rule consequentialism aim to maximize overall good, they differ in their approach to achieving this goal. Act consequentialism focuses on the specific consequences of individual actions, allowing for flexibility and adaptability in decision-making. In contrast, rule consequentialism looks at the consequences of following a set of rules or principles, providing a more stable and consistent moral framework.

One key difference between the two theories is the level of predictability they offer in decision-making. Act consequentialism allows for immediate consideration of consequences in each situation, which can lead to more unpredictable outcomes. Rule consequentialism, on the other hand, relies on predetermined rules that have been established to maximize overall good, offering a more predictable approach to ethical decision-making.

Another important distinction is the potential for moral ambiguity in each theory. Act consequentialism may lead to morally questionable actions if the consequences are not carefully considered, as the focus is on the immediate outcome of each action. Rule consequentialism, on the other hand, may result in situations where following a rule produces negative consequences in a specific case, raising questions about the universality of certain rules.

Despite these differences, both act consequentialism and rule consequentialism share the common goal of maximizing overall good. While act consequentialism prioritizes the specific consequences of individual actions and allows for flexibility in decision-making, rule consequentialism focuses on the consequences of following a set of rules or principles to provide a stable and consistent moral framework. Ultimately, the choice between the two theories may depend on the context of the ethical dilemma and the values of the individual making the decision.