Problem
I. Pretend you are a Utilitarian. As a Utilitarian, what would be the moral action in the following situation. Explain reasoning well.
For the past five years, you have let your spouse fill out and file your income tax statement. You didn't know it, but your spouse was lying on the form, claiming all kinds of deductions that were simply fabrications. A month ago, you received notification that you had been audited, and both you and your spouse were to be interviewed by an IRS agent. A week ago, as you prepared for the interview, your spouse explained that the false deductions that were claimed, if brought to light, would cost you both about $30,000.00 (excluding the interest that the IRS charges in these cases).
Now you are sitting in front of the interviewer and she begins questioning you about your deductions. As a Utilitarian, what is the moral action? Do you lie about the deductions or do you tell the truth?
II. Utilitarianism claims that our moral actions are based on the predicted consequences of our actions. Critics say this is a problem. Why do Utilitarians think that relying on consequences is not a problem? How do they defend using consequences to determine morality?
III. One defense of Utilitarianism is that the principle of utility is a guide for forming rules. What does this mean? Explain "rule Utilitarianism", discuss some of the rules that would be discovered, and show how those rules make sense.