Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism can be succinctly defined as a perspective dictating that the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people is ideal. Pragmatically, this is hard to refute.

If we are to define utility then we would be compelled to assert it as something that provides some fashion of benefit. Furthermore, when handling matters concerning human productions, benefit would be defined as whatever aids the mentality of humans, or rather, whatever makes humans happier. Therefor, utility coincides with subsequent happiness encouraged from utilization of said utility.

Utilitarianism. The best is what makes the most happy. Seems easy enough, right?

One fatal flaw. Happiness is not all encompassing. The countless variations of emotional state are all vital for integral development. Not a single one can be objectively stated as inferior to another. Happiness as an ultimate goal is a childish perspective of 'good and bad' with ambitions far too restricting. I'll use guilt as an example.

Guilt is an emotion that one feels when they observe that others have found their actions to be inferior or insufficient. When one feels guilt they normally feel obligated to rid the possibility of such guilt occurring in the future. This is true with other 'negative' emotions, as well. I digress. With the attempt to solve the problem of guilt one will better their situation. While they may not immediately remedy all such faults, they will *definitely* produce thoughts that will increase their mental activity in such a way that they will be better equipped for the future. In fact, all situations encountered cause a response that will give the person the *opportunity* to become better equipped for the future. Whether or not somebody is open-minded and creative enough to harness each moment is another thing.

So on the scale of personal development we can see that total happiness would fall short of allowing one to have complete development. Seems obvious, huh?

That's not all. Humans aren't the only thing in this universe, and there is absolutely nothing that causes us to fall under a different criteria for physical interactions. Gravity still affects us. We can't produce things against the will of the ever powerful wavefunctions that persist a stable flow of all universal actions. The most simplest way to put it is, the best is what happens. Because that is what is *stable*. Everything else would make the universe bluescreen. Crash. Kaboom.

So utilitarianism? A *convenient* ideal that should be encouraged in situations in which there are multiple people involved when no other superior system is available. Logically sound? Not quite.