Throwing out utilitarianism in ethics because you can't exactly calculate which actions precisely correspond to the brightest futures is a lot like throwing out

Throwing out utilitarianism in ethics because you can't exactly calculate which actions precisely correspond to the brightest futures is a lot like throwing out mathematical modelling in engineering because you can't exactly calculate which arrangements of atoms precisely correspond to the most optimal bridges. I'd be more open to questions about how a rational person might figure out what the best things to do are in the face of uncertainty, if the article's examples didn't include things like should we torture Jewish people for the enjoyment of Nazis? The right intervention to that is much more baseline, of actually stopping to think about what one is saying.