Is Act Utilitarianism an effective way of making moral decisions?

The study of philosophy demands a methodical approach. When we break down a problem, we make it manageable and answering the question becomes a less daunting task. The more questions you ask, the more sophisticated your beliefs and arguments will be.  In order to answer a question like this, or any philosophical or ethical question, you will need to think about three things: (1) The question: have I fully understood the question? is the question clear? are there any words in the question which need to be clarified? If so, how can I incorporate this clarification into my answer? (2) Definitions: all good philosophy essays must define the terms they are dealing with, this helps to avoid confusing answers, defines the shape of your essay and structures your argument. You should ask, which terms in this question are the relevant terms? And how are they defined? Obviously, definitions must be learnt. (3) Argument: philosophy is all about arguing effectively.  Your opinion, or the opinion you choose to argue for, must be coherent and backed up by thoughtful considerations. You should state your argument in your introduction, make sure the following paragraphs support and refer to your argument, then re-state your argument in the conclusion, in light of the considerations made. A good answer is clear, simple and repetitive. You must know arguments for and against your position. Wherever you commit a paragraph to supporting your argument, make sure the following paragraph is a criticism of that supporting paragraph, but show why, this criticism doesn't defeat your argument. 

Let us now see, how these preparatory considerations help us to answer this question: The essay should have a clear structure. Make sure each paragraph connects to the one before it and you're always referencing your argument and the question. If you are attributing a particular view to a philosopher, make sure you do so accurately. You might also want to think about using examples to illustrate your point. Make sure you reassert that you are the person arguing by the use of ‘I’. You should assume that the reader of your essay doesn't know anything about the topic and it is your job to tell them what they need to know. A well structured essay might take the following form: Introduction: State what your argument is, write a few brief sentences about your reasons for holding this position and tell the reader how you will progress through your essay. Definitions: choose and define your terms Paragraph 1(P1): give your first reason for holding your position or for the opposing position and supporting statements P2: give a counter-argument to argument you gave in P1 * Continue this structure until your conclusion Conclusion: This should be similar to your introduction. It should re-state your argument and summarise the reasons why your argument is correct in light of the considerations made. The question wants us to make a judgement on whether or not, the criteria given by Act Utilitarianism, is helpful when it comes to making decisions about how to do the right thing in certain, morally problematic situations. But, what exactly is meant by "effective"? It could mean that it is the most efficient way of making decisions because it allows decisions to be made quickly and easily. It could also mean that act utilitarianism provides the best criteria for moral standards, that is, what is good, is the maximisation of pleasure. How you choose to interpret "effective" will shape the rest of your essay. Note that, either of these definitions is acceptable, you might want to incorporate both into your single definition. (2) I have already mentioned how we might need to define the term "effective". The other terms which need defining include, "Act Utilitarianism" and possible "moral decisions". Act Utilitarianism can be defined as "a moral theory which states that an act is good if it maximises pleasure and minimises pain, in a particular situation". You might want to mention the utilitarian calculus as this is relevant to the idea of effective decision making. "Moral decisions" can be defined as "the act of choosing how to do the morally right thing in a situation”. (3) You must know the arguments for and against your positions. Let's assume that you want to argue that Act Utilitarianism is not an effective way of making moral decisions, what arguments might you choose (after you have done your introduction and definitions)? You might state part of your argument in the following way:  P1: One reason for thinking that act utilitarianism is an effective way of making moral decisions is because it provides an easy way to calculate how to do the right action… P2: However, I maintain that this argument is weak. It is not easy to predict the consequences of an action and therefore it is difficult to know how to maximise pleasure and minimise pain… Other reasons to hold your position include: Act utilitarianism seems to allow immoral acts (A counter-argument might be how, intuitively, we seem to think pleasure is morally relevant and an appropriate way to define whether or not something is good)In certain situations, for example, if two people are drowning where one is a doctor and one is not, there may not be time to use the calculus (A counter-argument might suggest that we know from experience which decision to make and so even in emergency situations, calculating the right action would not take that long)