the question is: Suppose that Joanne helps one needy stranger, and James helps another.

the question is: Suppose that Joanne helps one needy stranger, and James helps another. Joanne does so because she reasons that the assistance she gives to the stranger does more to make the world a better place than anything else she could do at that moment. But she's not sentimental about it and feels no particular sympathy for the stranger. James, by contrast, feels sympathy and acts at least in part on the basis of that feeling. Suppose further that their differing emotional states have no further consequences for anything in the remaining history of the world. How and why would a utilitarian and Aristotle differ in their evaluations of the two helpers?