It doesn't seem that there could be a utilitarian argument against murder that would be applicable if there were only two people. That is because, if only one is left after the murder and the murder is quite happy about it, then, such a murder would be for the greater good of all who are left. Or maybe the would-be victim's utilitarian argument against being murdered would amount to "Think of how lonely you'd be if you got rid of me!" An even more compelling point could be made re murder-suicide.
Here is a summary and comments on the essay Freedom and Resentment by PF Strawson. He makes some great points, and when he is wrong, it is in such a way as to clarify things a great deal. My non-deterministic position is much better thanks to having read this. I’ll summarize it in this post and respond in a later one. In a nutshell: PFS first argues that personal resentment that we may feel toward another for having failed to show goodwill toward us would have no problem coexisting with the conviction that determinism is true. Moral disapprobation, as an analog to resentment, is likewise capable of coexisting with deterministic convictions. In fact, it would seem nearly impossible for a normally-constituted person (i.e., a non-sociopath) to leave behind the web of moral convictions, even if that person is a determinist. In this way, by arguing that moral and determinist convictions can coexist in the same person, PFS undermines the libertarian argument ...
Comments