The difficulty of "converting" people to utilitarianism intimidates me, but what about a more established philosphy with the same effect? Specifically, the application of Buddhism because it tends to (from what I know) coincide with utilitarianist application quite often.
Take this situation, a utilitarian teacher and a Buddhist teacher face off, with 150 people each to convert...
The Buddhist approach:
-He can convert 100/150 of the people (people accept Buddhism; it's very big already!)
-Buddhism is 75% utilitarian (because most of the time, they have the same idea)
Then, his overall effect is .75 times 100 which equals 75 utilitarians
The utilitarian approach:
-He can convert only 50/150 of the people (convincing people of such a tough ethical belief is, well, tough)
-Utilitarianism is 100% utilitarian (duh)
Then, his overall effect is 1 times 50 which equals 50 utilitarians
In other words, let's say "acceptability" is the probability a potential convert actually converts. Also, let's say "coincidence" if the probability an action is correct (utilitarian).
Then, if the margin of victory of Buddhism's "acceptability" over utilitarian's "acceptability" (which I believe is much lower, therefore the margin of victory is large) is greater than the margin of victory of "coincidence" of utilitarianism (which is always 100%) over "coincidence" of Buddhism (which I believe is very close to 100%, therefore than margin of victory is small), then...
Converting people to Buddhism is more utilitarian than converting people to utilitarianism!
Did that make sense at all?