Classical Utilitarianism: Bentham's Act Utilitarianism

-

The principle of utility

Jeremy Bentham, a philosopher and social reformer was also an expert in law who was dedicated to a more just society addressing issues of excessive and unnecessary pain experienced by those in prison, in poverty, and to those in same-sex relationships. Happiness is, therefore, the supreme ethical value, or ‘the sovereign good’.

Bentham noticed that humans seek pleasure or happiness and avoid pain. He called this the ‘principle of utility’. The most useful ethical norm should be to seek pleasure and to avoid pain; in other words, what is right maximises happiness and minimises pain. The most useful actions are those which produce the most happiness for all.

This was then developed into both the ‘greatest happiness principle’. We should be concerned about others’ happiness because our happiness is bound up with theirs. This satisfied Bentham’s needs for social justice.

The hedonic calculus

In order to act in such a way as to increase general happiness and pleasure there needed to be a way to measure happiness. Bentham therefore devised what is known as the hedonic calculus (also known as the pleasure calculus). It measures seven different elements; each of which are equally important to determine the amount of pleasure produced by an act: 

1. Intensity measures how strong the pleasure is
2. Duration considers the amount of time the pleasure lasts
3. Certainty assesses the probability that the act will bring pleasure
4. Propinquity measures how close one is to the experience of pleasure
5. Fecundity considers the possibility of this pleasure increasing further
6. Purity measures how free of pain the pleasure is
7. Extent assesses how many people will benefit from the pleasure.

All pleasures were of equal value and using this calculator Bentham believed that the right course of action could be determined for every situation. Bentham did accept that a thorough calculation along these lines was not always possible; however, he felt that the hedonic calculus is an ideal we should attempt.

Bentham’s Utilitarianism is a teleological theory, concerned with the end result of actions in terms of the goal (telos) of bringing pleasure. It is therefore also a consequentialist theory because it judges actions to be right or wrong based on the variety of consequences that actions bring. It is also a relativist theory because it has no real set of moral rules but simply the principle of utility.

Bentham’s Utilitarianism is often called Act Utilitarianism as it has so much emphasis on considering the immediate effects of an individual action. Each action is unique and requires measuring and therefore the principle of utility should be applied on a case by case basis.

QUOTE BANK!!

Epicurus: “...when happiness is present, we have everything. When it is absent, we do everything to possess it.” 

Bentham: “Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters: pain and pleasure.” 

Bentham: “It is the greatest good to the greatest number of people which is the measure of right and wrong.” 

Bentham: “[Judge action] ...according to the tendency which it appears to have to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question.”

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Situation Ethics: Fletcher and Agape

-
Fletcher, influenced by earlier moral theologians, advocated a ‘new’ approach to Christian ethics between the two extremes of legalism and antinomianism. His solution was that we should always use the principle of love or agape (selfless love) applied to each unique situation, meaning that ‘right’ decision in one circumstance cannot be a blueprint for all circumstances. Fletcher considered his teachings as firmly grounded in ‘classical’ Christianity, a key text being Mark 2:27: "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath", indicating for Fletcher that the practical application of Christian love (agape) involved a more flexible approach to rules. For Fletcher, ‘absolute’ principles of right and good are not realistic; they became problematic if applied blindly without considering specific situations. He quotes Henry Miller's reference to legalism as ‘the immorality of morality’.  Fletcher argued that the Church’s legalistic approach that used ‘prefabricated rule...
Read more

Utilitarianism: Application

-
The use of animals for medical research Often, the principle of utility (or the ‘greatest happiness principle) is used to argue that human happiness in the long-term outweighs the suffering of animal experimentation. However, such philosophers as Peter Singer says we should have a rule against causing harm or suffering to any sentient being. However, the purpose of animal experiment should be considered; medical research after all, is more noble than cosmetic safety tests. The sheer numbers benefitting from successful treatments or controlling epidemics over against the amount of pain caused for animals is justification enough. Whether one uses Bentham or Mill is another variant. The above arguments would certainly support Mill; however, Jeremy Bentham argued famously, ‘the question is not, can they reason? Not, can they talk? But can they suffer?’ and indeed was an active campaigner for animal rights. Another point to consider is that any conclusion reached on for this area is difficu...
Read more

Irenaean type Theodicies

-
Irenaeus, like Augustine, did not have a systematic theodicy; unlike Augustine, Irenaeus presents God as responsible for the possibility of the existence of evil. This was deliberate because God wanted human beings to develop the qualities that would make them spiritually perfect. Crucial for Irenaean type theodicies is the first part of Genesis 1:26: ‘Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness.”’ For Irenaeus, human beings were created with partial maturity, but the potential to develop and grow into the image and likeness of God. Thus, Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden of Eden not because they were perfect and then sinned, but because they were immature. Hick Medieval theologians, and in last century the theologian John Hick, made an analogical distinction between ‘image’ (possessing the potential qualities of God’s spiritual perfection) and ‘likeness’ (actualising those qualities). John Hick disliked a literal reading of Genesis; instead h...
Read more