Final answer:
The 'too demanding objection' suggests that act utilitarianism indeed proposes that every act is up for moral evaluation, which is considered true, though this is also cited as an impracticality of the theory.
Step-by-step explanation:
The too demanding objection against act utilitarianism posits that it requires moral evaluation of every act, making it excessively demanding. This is due to the central principle of act utilitarianism, where the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its consequences, aiming to maximize happiness. Because considering every consequence of every potential action for how it contributes to overall happiness can be exceedingly burdensome, the objection suggests that act utilitarianism is impracticable. Some might argue that not every action necessitates moral scrutiny to this extent, as this could lead to moral paralysis and is contrary to our normal sense of differentiated moral weight for different actions.
Therefore, in relation to the too demanding objection, the assertion that act utilitarianism considers every act up for moral evaluation can be seen as true, though it is also argued that this is a flaw in the theory itself. This aspect of act utilitarianism contrasts with other moral theories which may not require constant moral assessment of every act.