This morning, in my Philosophy class, we were talking about John Stuart Mill’s theory on Utilitarianism. As always, I wasn’t really listening. I was reading The Mammoth Hunters by Jean Auel. But the topic on Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism caught my attention. Yes, I may be talking in another language here but believe me, it’ll be clear in a bit.

I’ll explain according to my understanding of the two types of utilitarianism of ethics. 

Act Utilitarianism judges the goodness of an act based on the event of happiness caused by the act.

Rule Utilitarianism evaluates the act in a way that it asks, “what if such an act is done every time that event occurs?” It assumes that the act is the rule in that event.

Why did I suddenly have a strong interest in this? It caught my attention because of a revelation I just knew the night before. And because of this, I’m making it an example of Act Utilitarianism vs. Rule Utilitarianism.

Act Utilitarianism. Not telling a friend an embarrassing secret about her. This with the motive that she not knowing would cause her less pain and thus more happiness. It would not make things awkward. It would then make her enjoy her life more.

Rule Utilitarianism. An the same example as above, a rule utilitarian would argue that it is more appropriate to tell the secret. Because in the end, it would make her sadder in event that she know about it. And if it were the case that a friend didn’t tell her about the secret on the first realistic and opportunistic moment, could you ever trust that particular friend again in telling you rumors about you? In that sense, is he/she even considered a friend?