Most basic form of Utilitarianism:
My Happiness over Yours

I became acutely aware of how little people value rightness over happiness or pleasure. This is the essence of Utilitarianism; the philosophy first discussed by Jeremy Bentham and succinctly defined in the above graphic. A classic dichotomy in Utilitarianism is encapsulated in the Star Trek character of Mr. Spock, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the One," to which Captain Kirk demonstrated, "The needs of the One may outweigh the needs of the many." As a Christian, which position would you believe to be correct?

If you chose either as an answer then you would have fallen prey to the False Dilemma logical fallacy as neither alternative is biblical. Yet, the Star Trek movies {Wrath of Khanand The Search for Spock} not only posit this dilemma but also guideyou to their answer; all without you knowing you were being programmed by entertainment propaganda. But, let us very briefly discuss Utilitarianism.

Utilitarianism Supports the Premise:
Needs of the Many Outweigh the One

In its most basic form the guiding criteria by which Goodis measured is happiness. Does an action, decision or thought promote the happiness of the many over the One, or the few. I capitalized One because the One is Self and few people think beyond of their immediate moment of maximizing pleasure, minimizing pain. Maximizing pleasure increases one's happiness is the mantra most people express even though they do not understand they are expressing Utilitarianism.

Most people under the sway of moderneducation have been indoctrinated with the value of doing good for the greatest number; anything less is evil. For example: climate change is predicated on taking steps to preserve the planet for the greater good of humanity as compared to doing less for the selfish Western cultures that seek their own short term pleasure/happiness. Though this is a False Dilemma not supported by the sciences it is the Fertile Fallacy by which sovereign nations will be brought under the control of an overarching centralized power to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number even if that requires force against the lesser number of resisters. Dr. Karl Popper, an early advocate of Open Borders{negation of sovereignty}, believed that achieving happiness was probably too great a goal, doomed to failure; however, if the goal was to cause lesspainthen this was achievable. Yes, changing industrial society will be painful but it will be less painfulthan having billions die because of preventable natural disasters that may degrade all societies; or so their hypothesis states. This brings us to another aspect of Utilitarianism: Rules.

Early Utilitarians were Altruistic
Later Utilitarians See the Need for Rules

Act Utilitarians (AU) believe people can be educated to choose the greater good even at the expense of their immediate pleasure. This altruistic view of humanity has not been supported by 20th-21st century history. The great savior, socialism, has been defeated or modified to survive in a capitalistic world when left to the dictates of individuals. People cannot be trusted to make correct decisions for the greater good in lieu of their own happiness. Therefore, Rule Utilitarianism (RU) has developed. In its most basic form an act is corrector right{moral} if it conforms to rules that are designed for the greater good of the greatest number of people. Though the word rule is used the actuality is that laws, backed by force, will mandate people act in a prescribed manner or suffer the consequences. Do we perceive this methodology at work today?

In America, the gun control versus Second Amendment debate centers about this very concern. Guns kill and therefore should be banned to secure the happiness for the greater good. To resist this movement is to support evil by allowing pain on those who will be killed by guns. The moral argument of one side against the other is irrelevant except as government legislators are persuaded to pass laws {rules} making gun ownership onerous or illegal. But, this debate is limited to one country. Is there another issue that affects other countries? Yes, the Social Justice movement targets the most successful Westernized countries.

The Social Justice (SJ) movement also conforms to Utilitarianism. Thus far it has sought change via altruistic AU propaganda; however, this has not sufficiently mobilized the populace to work against their own self-interest. Thus, RU is currently being incrementally phased in. This is especially true in Europe which has a rich history of nihilism: Post Modernism and Socialism. The Islamic migration crisisdemonstrated the needs of the many, Muslims from war torn zones and those who simply want to destroy all non-Muslim countries, are superior to the needs of the few, the inhabitants of European countries which embraced these nihilism. As the nations of Europe joined to form the European Union (EU) its Utilitarian influence changed from AU to RU; especially in the form of economic sanctions. However, it will not be long before force will be used to ensure the rules are implemented, and obeyed.

America is also undergoing its own migration crisis, again because of its meddling in the economies of Central and South America since the beginning of the Progressive Era. By preventing independent economic development America created the climate for social upheaval, economic stagnation and grinding poverty except to the few who receive American foreign aid, bribery. Now, these displaced millions are coming here proving the Bible true: whatever a person sows, that they will also reap (Ga 6:7). America's history has been one of increasing RU over AU not only nationally but also internationally through the use of force in the name of freedom and democracy. America, afraid of being dominated by an overarching international authority, is actually hastening the time when that will be a reality just to control our constant use of force; but, I digress.

Christians cannot be tolerated because the Bible does not teach that good is predicated on pleasure {happiness} for the many nor does it promote the idea of decreasing pain for the many as a good. Man's rejection of God's truth and substitution of his own reasoning, philosophy, is sin (Ro 1:18-32). This results in a downward spiral of degradation and violence predicated on deceit (Jo 8:44). No one is exempt from sin as all are born in sin and powerless to change without the direct intervention of God (Ro 3:10-18; Jo 10:25-30). If Utilitarianism were to work then it would have to negate biblical truth. Yet, sinners seek the determent of people to promote self though people will temporary band together for a common need against others (Ga 5:19-21; Ro 1:32). God allows those who reject Him, and His Goodness, to live as they choose (Ro 1:18-25). This is simply the tyranny of the majority, democracy, to justify one's sin by redefining sin as good(Mk 10:18). If man is good; then God must be evil and those who are saved by God must also be evil since they share His nature (2Co 5:17: Ga 2:20).