 One objection is that two @-@ level utilitarianism undermines an agent 's commitment to act in accordance with his or her moral principles . For example , a theist will comply with his / her moral code because he / she sees it as based upon God 's will . However , a two @-@ level utilitarian knows that his everyday set of moral rules is merely a guideline , and as such any breach of these rules is unlikely to accompany the same degree of guilt as would someone who believed that it was wrong in principle to act in that way . In reply to this objection , some utilitarians have put forward a " radical proposal " ; although they accept utilitarianism as the correct moral theory , it would be more beneficial if we do not proclaim this fact , and keep it a well @-@ guarded secret . " Utilitarianism would then become an esoteric doctrine , accepted by only a few philosophers who would , if challenged , deny its existence in public . " . This form of Utilitarianism ( commonly named as Government House utilitarianism ) , whilst having historically held traction ( Mill 's publications being in the 18th century ) , no longer presents such a convincing case in light of modern education levels and opportunities . 
