However, a similar objection was raised in 1970 by Thomas Nagel, who stated that the consequences « dealt with the desires, needs, satisfactions and discontents of different people, as if they were the desires of a mass person, etc. » [100] and even earlier by David Gauthier, who wrote that utilitarianism assumes that « humanity is a superhuman whose greatest satisfaction is the purpose of moral action…. But it`s absurd. Men have desires, not humanity; People seek satisfaction, not humanity. A person`s satisfaction is not part of a greater satisfaction. [101] Thus, the aggregation of utility becomes useless, for both pain and happiness are inherent in the consciousness in which they are felt and inseparable, making it impossible to group the different pleasures of several individuals. It also makes classical utilitarianism attacked on many sides. Obstinate adversaries posed many problems to classical utilitarianism. Each objection has led some utilitarians to abandon some of the original assertions of classical utilitarianism. By abandoning one or more of these assertions, descendants of utilitarianism can construct a variety of moral theories. Proponents of these theories often call them a consequentialism as utilitarianism, so that their theories will not be refuted by an association with classical utilitarian theory. However, the utilitarianism of the rule proposes a more central role for the rules that were supposed to save the theory of some of its most devastating critics, especially the problems related to justice and the maintenance of promises.

Smart (1956) and McCloskey (1957) first used the terms extreme and limited utilitarianism, but ultimately all attached themselves to the Prefix Act and rule instead. [46] [47] Similarly, in the 1950s and 1960s, articles were published for and against the new form of utilitarianism, and this debate created the theory we now call the utilitarianism of domination. In an introduction to an anthology of these articles, the publisher was able to say: « The development of this theory was a dialectical process of formulation, criticism, response and reformulation; the recording of this process illustrates the cooperative development of a philosophical theory. [44]:1 Utilitarianism is a version of consequentism that says that the consequences of action are the only measure of good and evil. Unlike other forms of coherence, such as selfishness and altruism, utilitarianism views the interests of all human beings in the same way. Proponents of utilitarianism are divided on a number of points, for example. B the question of whether the measures should be chosen on the basis of their likely results (nuutility) or whether agents must respect rules that maximize the benefits (rule utilitarianism).