Final answer:
Utilitarianism, a moral theory advocating the greatest good for the greatest number, does not necessarily imply materialism, a metaphysical position that regards only material or physical processes as real. These two philosophical concepts address different aspects—ethics and the nature of existence, respectively—and should not be conflated.
Step-by-step explanation:
Contrary to some conceptions, utilitarianism does not necessarily imply materialism. Utilitarianism is a moral theory that focuses on the consequences of actions, principally advocating for the greatest good for the greatest number. This principle, known as the principle of utility, places the emphasis on outcomes that maximize happiness or reduce unhappiness. Materialism, on the other hand, is a metaphysical position that denies the existence of anything other than material or physical processes.
It suggests that mental phenomena are, ultimately, physical states.
While utilitarianism, as described by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, does refer to psychological states of pleasure and pain, it does not claim that these states are solely material. The approach of utilitarianism can be applied to both material and immaterial aspects of life, considering a variety of human experiences and values beyond just tangible or physical goods. Hence, utilitarianism and materialism deal with different philosophical questions – the former with ethics and the latter with the nature of existence. They operate on different planes of thought and should not be conflated, even though they may intersect in practical applications where the impact on human well-being involves material conditions.