Utilitarianism

I am a consequentialist all the way. Many of my decisions I make are based off of the consequences that may follow afterwards.

I know I’m not the only consequentialist because the government itself also makes decisions based off of consequences. Laws by themselves are made based off of consequences. Everyone knows that when you go and rob an old lady you get immediate jail time. The same comes with doing 60MPH in a 45MPH zone. You get a ticket. And when you get enough tickets and don’t pay them, you go to jail.

The decision of passing certain laws are being based off of consequences also. For example, same-sex marriage. Although WE may think the government should legalize it, they look at the consequences of passing the law. Whatever those consequences may be.

But when the tables are turned, and someone who believes in deontology is presented with said scenarios, they would first say that calculating consequences and how happy the majority would be is too time consuming. However, they would also say that one should follow the speed limit and follow the law. They would also say that one should not rob an old lady, and follow their mind.

So what’s the real difference between these two? Utilitarianism focuses mainly on the consequences and how many people would be happy vs. how many would be unhappy. Deontology focuses on behaving in such a moral way that it could be the maxim for every other moral agent to act.

But does making more people happy make you moral? Or does acting in such a way that you believe the world should act make you moral? Is it really important to worry about the rest of the world acting morally? Or should you just do what’s right based off of the consequences that YOU have to deal with?