In extreme situations, survival cannibalism could be justified by a utilitarian because it potentially increases the chances of survival for those involved, preserving life and happiness over death. The immediate benefit is the survival of the individuals, which brings pleasure through continued life. The pain of consuming human flesh and the emotional trauma afterward would be significant but might be outweighed by the greater good of survival.

Hedonic Calculus

- INTENSITY : The emotional and psychological trauma from cannibalism is intense, but the pleasure of survival is also high.

- DURATION : The trauma could last a lifetime, but the benefit of survival may last for years or even decades.

- CERTAINTY : Survival may be highly certain if cannibalism provides the necessary nutrients for continued life, but the psychological pain is uncertain and depends on the individuals involved.

- PROXIMITY : The need for survival is immediate, making the decision to engage in cannibalism a matter of urgency.

- EXTENT : The greater number of lives saved by the act would increase the total happiness or well-being.

UTILITARIAN VIEW ON CONSENT TO CANNIBALISM :

If individuals in a survival situation willingly consent to being eaten after death, a utilitarian could see this as a form of self-sacrifice for the greater good, as it allows others to survive and potentially save lives. The consent might bring some comfort to the individual, knowing their sacrifice will benefit others. The individual might experience some psychological pain or fear before death, but if they consent, this pain should be minimized.

Hedonic Calculus

- INTENSITY : The intensity of pain would likely be high for those consenting, but the pleasure of saving lives could outweigh this.

- DURATION : The duration of benefit would be long-term for survivors, while the pain of those who consent might be fleeting (depending on how it is handled).

- CERTAINTY : The certainty of survival for the group might justify the sacrifice, although the emotional impact on both the consented-to and the consumers could be uncertain.

- PROXIMITY : The immediacy of the need for survival could pressurize individuals into making decisions quickly, though the consent beforehand might lessen the emotional burden.

- EXTENT : If multiple people consent and the group survives as a result, the benefit is extended across the entire group, making it more ethically justifiable.