Hence, his theory was not just applying to individuals but to the whole of society and was
democratic. Bentham argued that when faced with a moral dilemma, a person should act on what
would be the most utile to the greatest number of people. This proposed a problem however, on
how one could judge how utile an action was, and this led to the development of the hedonic
calculus.
The hedonic calculus weighs up pleasure and pain generated by moral actions to find the
best option. When weighing up the consequences, the hedonic calculus explores; its intensity, its
duration, its certainty, its remoteness, its fecundity, its purity and its extent. This means that
Bentham’s hedonic calculus looks at pain on a much broader scale than just how many people
are affected. He considers the pain of repercussions and also the type of pain an individual may
experience.
Two types of utilitarianism have emerged since Jeremy Bentham first invented it; act
utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism is the form that Bentham is more closely
associated with because it is the principle where utilitarianism is applied to individual situations
and has the flexibility of being able to assess every individual action in a certain time, although
the actions that it justifies can change with time. Therefore, if jumping traffic one day causes the
greatest good, and obeying the road laws the next day causes the greatest good, then a persons
actions from one day to the next will change.
Rule utilitarianism, however, focuses on general rules that everyone has to obey. Rule
utilitarians would say that jumping traffic on any day was wrong, because the law is in place for
the greatest good of the community. This form of utilitarianism is associated with John Stuart
Mill and involves sacrificing your personal happiness sometimes to obey laws and rules enforced
to create law and order which benefit everybody in the long run.
Examine and consider criticisms which have been made against utilitarianism. (10)
Act utilitarianism is seen as a way of justifying breaking laws. For example, if murdering a person
can be justified because it causes the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people, then
people would go around murdering for the good of mankind. People can only really establish
what is better for society on a personal level, their opinion of whether their act of murder is right
might not be other people’s opinion on whether it is right. Therefore, act utilitarianism is not
effectively sound. However, to counteract this argument, rule utilitarianism has been brought
about by John Stuart Mill. This states that laws in society should be followed as strictly as
possible, so that the greater good for society is achieved and leaves little option for personal
perception to corrupt an act of evil or good.
The theory of utilitarianism banishes selfish pleasures and welcomes democratic
decisions that cause the greatest good to a large amount of people. It is a practical theory and can
be applied to real life situations without a need for any special wisdom, only considering actions
before we carry them out- which is natural anyway. There are, however, a great deal of criticisms
of the theory.
The first being that all decisions are decided on whether or not the outcome of an action
is good or not. It relies on accurate predictions of the future and this is not possible, no
outcomes are guaranteed, especially the outcomes of big decisions. Consequences of an action
may be delayed for some considerable amount of time, years, decades, centuries, and human
beings cannot know this. Hence it is difficult to use teleological ethics to make complicated
decisions and utilitarianism is therefore not efficient.
The second criticism is the fact different pleasures and different pains cannot be easily
quantified. Although the hedonic calculus makes it appear straightforward, the birth of a child
and eating a chocolate bar cannot be judged on the same scale. John Stuart Mill criticised the
hedonic calculus and made a new scale which separated types of pleasures. Here he concluded
that pleasures of the mind were more important than bodily pleasures, and thus this makes
utilitarianism a better model for life, favouring paths of knowledge and self improvement to
paths of drug abuse and promiscuous sex which on Bentham’s calculus were equally as
important. The hedonic calculus alone is somewhat inefficient in creating a good society.
The third criticism is the difficulty of justice, because while utilitarianism goes about
giving pleasure to the largest amount of people, it guarantees nothing for the minority. Therefore
acts like sadistic guards torturing their prisoners could be allowed, and the Nazi policies of Jewish
extermination could be justified if it created the largest amount of pleasure for the largest amount
of people. In A Theory of Justice by John Rawls, this issue is highlighted and it explains the need
to protect minorities.
The fourth criticism is that utilitarianism gives no definition on what definitely causes
pain or pleasure. One person’s pleasure may be the other persons pain, so making decisions for
the majority of people is impossible. The premise on which utilitarianism is based is weakened
because there is no definite answer on what causes pain or pleasure, so no rule can be made for
general purposes.
In conclusion, despite its faults, utilitarianism has proved very popular, even by today’s
standards. People have followed hedonism especially, seeking their own pleasure from their
actions.. ‘It remains a persuasive ethical theory due its practical dimension, which provides organisations with
clear-cut system for making decisions.’
Personally I think utilitarianism is a posh name for common sense, and that there is no
way people can write law books for ethics in life, but instead people should use the theories as
rough guides to decisions. Everyone makes decisions differently, and there can be no handbook
to being a good person, it has to come from within. However, I respect John Stuart Mill’s
theories more than Bentham’s original plan, as he explain mind pleasures are more important
than bodily pleasures, and this clarified an issue that was severely wrong with basic utilitarianism.
