Ken and John start off by asking Wayne how he became interested in utilitarianism, and Wayne tells them it is because he wanted to study something useful. Ken and John immediately delve into how unuseful utilitarianism seems to be, given that it seems nearly impossible to measure the net utility of an action, over an indeterminate span of time, and over an indeterminately large group of people. Wayne, Ken and John discuss how to relate the rightness or wrongness of an action against the moral culpability one has for performing that action, given the difficulty of figuring the net utility of your action.

In the next segment, Ken and John try to untangle exactly whose welfare should count, and how much, in a utilitarian calculation. Do animals’ welfare count? Does it count as much as humans’ welfare? Do future individuals welfare count? Is it ever okay to count the welfare of those you love more than others? In answering these questions, they discuss whether it is better to have more less happy creatures or fewer more happy creatures, whether there are different kinds of pleasure which can count differently in a calculation, and what to do about the cows we want to eat.

在最后一段，Ken提出了他对功利主义和权利的担忧:功利主义难道不需要牺牲无辜的人来造福社会吗?韦恩说，很多时候功利主义需要尊重权利，因为违反权利会被证明是“有风险的和适得其反的”。韦恩、肯和约翰讨论了如何平衡每个人的权利与所有人的福利，以及为了福利而牺牲权利的现实必要性(或非必要性)。特别是，他们担心会出现歧视侵害人权和福利衡量相对化的局面。肯认为功利主义更适合社会决策者，而不是他本人和他自己的道德选择。

• Roving Philosophical Report(seek to 5:00): Julie Napolin visits a rescue clinic for animals that are not conventionally considered needy but in some ways obviously are so (the ‘Animal Place’,www.animalplace.org): the chickens, pigs, and cows animals that are not only not pampered with petting – but actually killed and eaten! How do, and how should, we think about these animals welfare?

• Conundrum(seek to 47:15) Jim calls from Copperopolis and inquires whether he may morally raise fifteen kittens for one year each rather than raise one cat for fifteen years. Ken and John haul out their mutatis mutandis reasoning skills, and try to help Jim out by considering the relevant analogies with people, professors, and cows in India.