utilitarianism is generally considered to only value outcomes and not any acts themselves. So, one is comparing “a person dying” and “5 people not dying”, unle

utilitarianism is generally considered to only value outcomes and not any acts themselves. So, one is comparing “a person dying” and “5 people not dying”, unless there’s something about the experience of the death-due-to-murder and the death-due-to-illness that differs and is taking into account as part of the outcome. If you assign value to acts, then you don’t really have utilitarianism anymore, and you can probably describe nearly any ethical system in that language?