Jeremy Bentham & Utilitarianism

What is Utilitarianism?
All human actions should be evaluated according to single moral principle: the
greatest happiness for the greatest number (Benthams phrase)
Utilitarianism tells us the morally right action or policy is the one that produces the
most happiness (or utility or elfare) overall
!imple e"ample: (A) go to pub ith friends or (B) visit mother#
o (A) $esults in %& units of pleasure for me & friends ' %( units of pain for
mother ) & units utility
o (B) $esults in %( units pleasure for mother * + units pleasure for friends ' &
units pain for me ) %% units utility,
Utilitarianism tells us that (B) is the morally right act because it results in the best
conse-uences in terms of overall happiness
!ocial rules and las should also be evaluated by the same standard: do they
ma"imise utility#
Utilitarianism is the master moral principle hich .ustifies other rules or las e
follo (e,g, las prohibiting rape/ murder/ theft etc0)
has been the most poerful1influential doctrine in moral theory & been developed by
philosophers such as Jeremy Bentham/ J, !, 2ill/ $, 2, 3are/ J, J, 4, !mart/ 5ere6
7arfit & 7eter !inger
Defining Happiness
3o should e define happiness or utility#
Bentham offers a hedonistic account of utility, 3edonistic theories define pleasure
and pain purely in terms of physical or mental feelings, 8his account of utility runs
into 9 main ob.ections,
(%) 8he 2atri" dilemma: nobody ants to be 2r Anderson, Almost everyone places
value on e"periences being authentic or real ' its nice/ but not enough for them to
feel good, :s this fair to Bentham# ;hats the harm if 2r Anderson never gets
unplugged#
<ife can go badly for you even if you never find out (e,g, the cheated spouse),8here
are other ays of defining happiness that may avoid this problem (more on this ne"t
ee6),
(9) =oodness cant be reduced to 7leasure, ;riting poetry/ or6ing out at the gym
etc0 are things that many people thin6 are good things to do/ even if they feel
painful
Calculating Happiness
3o should e calculate utility# >eed to 6no about ? factors:
%, :ntensity,
9, 5uration,
@, 4ertainty or uncertainty (probability of e"perience occurring),
A, 7ropensity or remoteness (ho soon is it going to occur#),
&, Becundity (chance of being folloed by more of the same),
+, 7urity (chance of being folloed by the opposite),
?, C"tent (ho many people are affected),
Bentham argues that/ in theory/ all e"periences are measurable on these ? dimensions,
8his means e can -uantify and compare any 9 e"periences in terms of their overall
utility,
The Oyster & the Artist
Benthams theory is counterDintuitive because some e"periences dont seem
comparable,
8he problem of the oyster and the artist: call this the incomparability ob.ection to
utilitarianism,
4an Bentham respond to this ob.ection#
(&) Becundity ' ill e"perience lead to more of same#
(+) 7urity ' ill e"perience lead to opposite#
Better understood by using theory of 5iminishing 2arginal Utility (52U), 52U
tells us that the more of something you have/ the less valuable each unit of that thing
becomes to you,
5oes this e"plain the problem of the oyster & the artist# Bentham probably cannot
escape problems of -uantification and comparison (more on this ne"t ee6)
Distributing Happiness
!o far have been loo6ing at utility calculation for single individual/ but utilitarianism
is also supposed to be theory for politics hich re-uires social calculation, 8his
means e need to focus on factor (?) e"tent of e"perience (ho many people
affected#)
Utilitarianism re-uires that e ma"imiEe utility overall, $aises problem of utility
monsters, 7hilosopher John $als says this shos that utilitarianism does not
recognise the separateness of persons, Utility ma"imiEation may be rational for single
person/ but seems irrational as principle for entire society,
Utilitarianism treats society as single moral being,
8his may leave some individuals constantly being sacrificed for good of others,
Bentham might respond to these ob.ections in to ays,
(%) 4ould argue that utility monster situations dont really occur in real orld, 8his
response is vulnerable to counter D e"amples,
(9) 4ould argue that some preferences should be ruled out as illegitimate, 8his
response is -uestion D begging ' hy should a utilitarian ant to rule out certain
e"periences from calculus#
The Integrity of Persons
;hat happens hen utilitarian calculations conflict ith special pro.ects or
relationships in our lives# C"ample of the friend vs, the runaay train,
4an the utilitarian escape these sorts of difficulties# Utilitarian could appeal to
psychological pain caused from 6illing friend outeighs benefits of saving lives, 8his
response has to problems,
(%) seems very implausible that psychological pain ill be so great as to outeigh
saving doEens of lives,
(9) :f you are a utilitarian ma6ing decision then you should feel no psychological pain
in doing right action,
Utilitarianism seems to leave no room for our on pro.ects/ commitments &
relationships,
C,g, are e all morally re-uired to devote every a6ing hour to charity or6#
C,g, has difficulty e"plaining moral value of promises and obligations: (e,g, the
cheating spouse)
What is the Appeal of Utilitarianism?
%, Utilitarianism is a complete & systematic moral theory, Because there is only one
master moral principle (ma"imiEe utility) it can alays/ in theory/ provide a
determinate anser to the -uestion: hat should : do# there is thus no possibility of
serious moral conflict,
9, Utilitarianism cares only about suffering and happiness, 8his seems to match our day
' to D day e"perience, :t does not re-uire us to believe in empirically unobservable
ideals,
@, :t is a conse-uentialist theory of morality, :t defines hat is FgoodG (utility) & then
tells us that morality re-uires us to choose the outcome that contains the most FgoodG,
8his matches our deepDrooted intuitions, 3o could it ever be right to choose a orse
outcome over a better one#