The hedonic calculus can also be used to calculate which action will bring about the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people possible. It is a quantitative idea and uses seven different criteria in order to assess whether the action is the most moral action. It assesses the pleasure of an action by many factors; intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity and extent. The balance of these is then compared to the hedonic calculus of another action which is to decide which option will bring about the most amount of pleasure. However, many people believed that calculating pleasure in quantitative terms was impractical and was not the right way to measure happiness, as the hedonic calculus could not be used in the spur of the moment. However, it was still difficult to measure the pleasure of an action as lower pleasures first need to be satisfied in order to complete a higher pleasure. For example, you cannot produce a piece of artwork without first eating and drinking until your body is satisfied that the artwork is finished. A counter argument to this is that Mill came up with the greatest happiness principle, meaning that an action was morally right if it produced the most amount of happiness at the time according to the ranking of higher and lower pleasures, an action becomes seemingly impossible. However, Mill was perceived to be a weak rule utilitarian. Rule utilitarianism assesses moral rules’ consequences against the rules of utility and then each individual act is assessed by the moral rules of that action. This in principle borders on a deontological theory as it instead concentrates on following moral rules instead of assessing an action on the consequence it creates. However, this theory can be seen as more efficient than act utilitarianism as it uses the guidance of past rules to predict the consequence of the particular