The following are potential thesis statements generated from the provided data on Utilitarianism, exploring various aspects and offering different angles:

Option 1 (Focus on Historical Development): The evolution of Utilitarianism, from its foundational articulation by Bentham to its diverse interpretations by Mill and Moore, reveals a complex interplay between individual liberty, societal well-being, and the inherent challenges in quantifying happiness.

Option 2 (Focus on the Divergence of Thought): While sharing a common goal of maximizing happiness, the differing approaches to Utilitarianism adopted by Bentham, Mill, and Moore highlight fundamental disagreements regarding the nature of happiness, the role of individual rights, and the practical application of the theory.

Option 3 (Focus on the Influence of Predecessors): The development of Utilitarianism by Bentham, Mill, and Moore was significantly shaped by the earlier ethical frameworks of Hobbes, Locke, Hutcheson, and Hare, demonstrating a continuous evolution of thought in the pursuit of a morally sound system for evaluating actions.

Option 4 (Focus on the Challenges of Application): The enduring appeal and persistent challenges of Utilitarianism lie in its seemingly simple principle of maximizing happiness, which, in practice, confronts complex issues of measurement, prediction, and the potential for unforeseen consequences.

Option 5 (Comparative Analysis): A comparative analysis of Bentham's, Mill's, and Moore's versions of Utilitarianism reveals distinct approaches to defining happiness, weighing consequences, and addressing the potential conflicts between individual and collective well-being.

Option 6 (Focus on a Specific Aspect): Mill's refinement of Bentham's Utilitarianism, particularly his emphasis on higher and lower pleasures, represents a crucial shift in the theory, addressing criticisms regarding its potential for justifying morally objectionable actions.

Option 7 (Focus on the Limitations): Despite its enduring influence, Utilitarianism faces significant limitations in its attempts to provide a universally applicable ethical framework, particularly in its struggles to account for individual rights and the complexities of human motivation.

These are just examples, and the best thesis statement will depend on the specific focus and scope of the intended work. Further refinement might be needed based on the specific arguments and evidence presented in the final paper.