comparison with Kantian ethics, Kantian the action that has intrinsic moral value is that of good will. You know your action has moral value by examining the maxim (the underlying principle or the action that motivates you to do something) whereas with Utilitarianism, the action that has moral value is the one that produces overall happiness or the most preferences satisfied. An example of how they differ is (with reference to the murderer scenario mentioned during the Kantian ethics lectures) Kantian ethics states that a perfect duty (something that must always be met) is to never lie, coerce or deceive people – whereas utilitarianism virtually justifies the act of lying, on the basis that it brings about the most happiness or satisfies the most preferences.
However they are quite similar in a way where you can determine whether the action has moral value or not, in utilitarianism with Jeremy Bentham’s calculating hedonic value (which could be quite inconvenient) and in regards to Kantian Ethics has the joining of good will (positive underlying maxim) + duty = moral value (a more convenient and easy way)

I disagree with the idea of utilitarianism, because it states that any action is justifiable and is morally right as long as it has better consequences and produces the most happiness or satisfies the most preferences. So that would mean that it justifies cheating, stealing, lying and breaking promises depending on whether or not they bring about the most happiness. If I was lying to my boyfriend about sneaking out to a party, because it brought about the most happiness to my 4 friends, that would make my action justified and morally right because its bringing about the most happiness for the most people and only one person would be left unhappy (given he finds out I lied).

I object to the utilitarianism theory on the grounds that I personally don’t think I could live my life as a utilitarian. If that meant that any (what I would perceive as morally wrong) action was justified such as: lying, cheating, etc, just to produce the most happiness or satisfy the most preferences. I would relate more to utilitarianism with regards to the egoist consequentialist theory as opposed to the utilitarian one. Because in every day life, with every action I do, I’m always thinking about how this would affect me, as opposed to thinking about how it would affect everyone else. Or I think about what would make me happy, despite if it would make others happy or not. But i suppose in some sense, if I think about situations regarding my family, I would consider them and their desires and potentially come to compromise. As opposed to situations regarding strangers (for example, on a bus where there are limited seats, generally people (including myself) are all about trying to get a seat for themselves and very few are willing to give up a seat for someone else). So it just depends on the circumstances. On the other hand, its likely that some things I do subconsciously relate to utilitarianism.