As the discussion there are three main events under this theory. First all actions must be judged from the consequence of the actions. Secondly, the judgment is about the quantum of happiness these actions have generated. Lastly, each person’s welfare is equally important and actions must be directed to this objective.
There are two sub theories of Utilitarianism. Van Wyck explains that under Act Utilitarianism theory the view taken is that a right action is one that is also chosen by another individual, and the common intention is to produce at least the same good result. Under this theory an action is taken for the larger good even if it means abandoning or ignoring a rule or set of rules. In other words ends justify the means.
This study stresses that the proponents of the other theory called Rule Utilitarianism believe firmly in observing rule and not encroaching on others happiness even if the happiness of a larger group is likely to be affected. This means that rules are meant to be followed to preserve sense and balance in a society.
The other group called Deontological theory hold that obligations must be followed irrespective of consequences. Deontologists insist that actions are morally in the wrong not because of their consequences, but because fundamentally these actions are a moral violation (Boxill). Morally right mans approved by God and morally wrong means disapproved by God. The will of God is the arbiter of right or wrong. In 1907 Henry Sidgwick expanded the Greatest Happiness principle to conclude that welfare of the people was more paramount than mere happiness. He felt that utilitarianism could be used to balance the morality of “common sense:” In effect Sidgwick attempted to bring utilitarianism into mainstream thinking of other less philosophical theories on ethics.