Which statement best distinguishes act-utilitarianism from rule-utilitarianism?

• A. Act-utilitarianism focuses on following rules; rule-utilitarianism focuses on consequences of individual acts
• B. Act-utilitarianism evaluates each act by its consequences; rule-utilitarianism evaluates rules by the consequences of following them
• C. Act-utilitarianism uses social contracts; rule-utilitarianism uses natural law
• D. Act-utilitarianism emphasizes virtue, rule-utilitarianism emphasizes duties

Answer: (B)

The main idea is how outcomes guide moral judgment in utilitarianism. Act-utilitarianism judges each individual action by its specific consequences in that situation, so the right action is the one that produces the greatest net happiness for that case. Rule-utilitarianism, by contrast, asks which rule, if universally followed, would lead to the best overall outcomes; we adopt and follow that rule, even if a particular act might seem to have better consequences in isolation.

For example, lying might sometimes appear to produce good results in a specific instance, which act-utilitarian reasoning could permit. A rule-utilitarian approach would consider the broader effect of lying as a rule—if everyone lied, trust would collapse and overall utility would drop—so the preferable rule would be to refrain from lying.

Other options mix up the focus (rules versus acts) or bring in unrelated frameworks, but the core distinction here is how each form of utilitarianism treats consequences: act-utilitarianism centers on the consequences of the individual act, while rule-utilitarianism centers on the consequences of following a rule.