One of the earliest Utilitarians to live by this principle was Epicurus – he stated that “Friendship goes dancing round the world proclaiming to us all to awake
to the praises of a happy life.”
He believed that a good life was one with pleasure and the absence of pain.
The other exponent of Utilitarianism is John Stuart Mill. He had a strict upbringing having very little contact with the outside world. He was around intelligent people a lot of the time as his father’s friends consisted of philosophers, politicians, and economists-one being Bentham. He joined the Utilitarian Society, which met at Jeremy Bentham’s house – this is where Mill became interested in the theory. Two of his important books were ‘On Liberty’ in 1859 and ‘Utilitarianism’ in 1861. Mill wanted to modify Bentham’s theory of Utilitarianism to make it more acceptable.
There were a number of things Mill did to change Utilitarianism. Bentham suggested that all pleasures were of equal value, no pleasures were higher or lower than others. This evoked criticism so the main point he made was that of changing qualitative pleasure to quantitative pleasure. He divided pleasure into two, higher and lower. The higher pleasures were associated with the mind, and the lower pleasures with the body. Once the basic lower pleasures of the body (food, water etc.) have been reached, we can then go in search of higher, intellectually challenging pleasures. Mill said:
“Better to be a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied;
better to be a Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.”
Mill also linked Utilitarianism with Christian morality. He connected the theory with the teachings of Jesus. He said that the ‘ideal perfection of utilitarian morality’ was abiding by the ‘Golden Rule’-‘Do onto others as you have them do to you.’ This made many more people accept Utilitarianism as it linked with their religion. Rules were introduced into Utilitarianism by Mill. The rules introduced were ones that generally brought about the greatest happiness for the greatest number. For example, Mill argued that society needs the principal of truthfulness as it brings the most happiness on the long run.
There are three types of Utilitarianism, Act, Rule, and Preference. Act Utilitarianism is where you look at the consequences of each individual action and asses which brings the most good. Act Utilitarians like Bentham do not see the need for rules when deciding morality, each situation is different. Rule Utilitarianism does not look at individual acts but the usefulness of a rule in morality. Mill was an Act Utilitarian and applied rules that usually bring the most good to situations. Strong Rule Utilitarians never break rules, and Weak Rule Utilitarianism keep rules in mind yet are prepared to break them if necessary. Preference Utilitarianism is where the preferences of those involved are taken into account when making the decision. The morally right thing to do in any situation is one that satisfies most people’s preferences.
Utilitarianism is used in many societies, especially in politics. We encounter it every time we make a democratic vote. Our government rule by majority without the consent of the minority. Right and wrong are relative to the people involved and the things that give them pleasure. Utilitarianism is there to ensure that this pleasure is present and is maximised to its full potential.
b) What do you consider to be the strengths and weaknesses of Utilitarianism as a moral theory?
As with all moral theories, there are strengths and weaknesses. Although they are both Utilitarians, Bentham and Mill disagreed with each other on some matters. Many different people have their own interpretations of Utilitarianism and some may not agree with the strengths and weaknesses but here are some of the major arguments connected with the theory.
The major criticism of Utilitarianism is that it is extremely hard to predict the results of an action. The outcomes of all situations are hard to predict, so how can we possibly apply the rule of the greatest happiness for the greatest number if we do not know who will benefit most? It is also difficult to decide whether an outcome is morally good or bad. People have contrasting opinions on what they think is right or wrong. It really depends on the person who is making the decision, a lot of pressure is then put on that person’s shoulders. How can we define happiness? The decision-maker may have a different perception on happiness than others-causing conflict. “One man’s happiness is another man’s pain.” Without an absolute definition of happiness, it is hard to arrive at a ‘right’ decision.
Different decisions may result in different kinds of pleasure. Is long term or short term pleasure more valuable? For example, when deciding whether to take an ecstasy tablet at a club. Taking the pill may give you a lot of short-term pleasure, but in the long term, it may cause more harm than good. Not taking the tablet would involve fewer risks and would avoid potential pain. Even here, you cannot predict the results of your decision, as there is no way of telling the effect the ecstasy has on you until you have tried it. Bentham would look for the long-term pleasures, as this is what Hedonists seek. Also, we do not know how long the result will last for. Hume argued for this statement:
“The effects of an action form part of a chain that stretches into the indefinite
future. Here is always the possibility that a very positive result of an action
may subsequently lead to very negative consequences.”
How do we decide which pleasure the majority would prefer? This refers to preference Utilitarianism where the action is taken that is most favourable to the majority.
The rules of Utilitarianism allow people to do things, which are usually considered immoral. This is the idea of “The end justifies the means”. If an action brings about the greatest happiness for the greatest number, then whatever needs to be done to obtain this is just. This means that even serious rules are permitted, Often requiring the breaking of the law. Utilitarianism requires people to put their personal feelings and ties aside and act on the absolute rule of the theory. Prior commitments a person may have should not influence their decision, although when decisions need to be made quickly, the reflex action would be to act on human instinct (e.g. save their family).
Bentham’s theory is suggesting that good and happiness are the same thing. G.E. Moore argued that moral terms such as good cannot be defined. It is wrong to define good as happiness as this is creating the naturalistic fallacy. He believed that by defining good, important aspects or meanings are missed out, so by not defining them, they stay as they are. Utilitarianism sees that everybody’s duty is to do what is best for the majority. It is allowing for the well being of the majority to rule over the minority. Just because the majority benefit, it does not mean that the action is the morally correct thing to do.
Despite all the arguments against Utilitarianism, there are some valid points for the theory. It is widely accepted, many countries run by means of democracy. Our political leaders are elected through the ballot box, the majority overriding the minority. This however does not automatically mean that they are the most suited people for the job. Utilitarianism allows people to contemplate the situation before making the decision. This time prevents people from making hasty, unethical judgements, as it encourages thought before action.
The aim of the theory is to produce happiness and pleasure. These are two desirable things as Utilitarianism says that pleasure is the sole good and pain is the soul evil.
“Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign
masters-pleasure and pain”
A theory that promotes pleasure must be a good thing as most people see pleasure as desirable over pain. The intention of Utilitarianism was not to create immorality but to please to maximum number of people possible. Surely it is better for a hundred people to be happy than five. There are other ethical theories that have many rules you have to learn and abide by. Utilitarianism has one simple absolute which can be applied to all situations with a positive outcome. In times of difficulty, it eases people out of difficult situations. They cannot be blamed for making the wrong decision if they claim it was for the happiness of the majority
Prejudices the decision maker may hold are eradicated in Utilitarianism, as they have to stick to the main rule. There is some leeway for emotions in moral decision making according to Rule Utilitarianism. This strand of the theory allows respect for the rules that are created to better our society. Even these rules do not have to be kept all the time if you are a weak rule Utilitarian. Some people would see this kind of Utilitarianism more compassionate than Act Utilitarianism. One of the main strengths is that it prevents the few people that think they better the rest from dictating society. Utilitarianism acts as a good weapon for reform.
Utilitarianism is a theory that Christians can relate to. Mill brought it closer to the Christian church by introducing Rule Utilitarianism. This would be closer to the principals Jesus lived by. For example, it was against the Jewish law to work on the Sabbath but when people were in need, Jesus bent this rule and healed them. The largest connection Christianity has with Utilitarianism is the death of Jesus. He was crucified and died for the sins of mankind-sacrificing himself for the majority. However, Utilitarianism does accept evil where Christianity most certainly does not.
Philosophers like Bentham and Mill worked hard to produce a theory that could aid us make complex decisions with a desirable outcome. The different types of Utilitarianism make it easier to live by, yet it is hard not to let our emotions override our actions. Despite the many flaws in the theory, it is simple and easy to apply. Our legal and political system work by the theory and are not corrupt, so why shouldn’t our morality?
Bibliography:
Ethical Theory – Mel Thompson
Foundation for the Study of Religion – Libby Ahluwalia
Dialouge – Robert Kirkwood
The Puzzle of Ethics – Peter Vardy & Paul Grosch
A Beginner’s Guide to Ideas – William Raeper & Linda Smith
Concise Oxford Dictionary
Encarta Encyclopaedia
