Jeremy Bentham And John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism

1022 Words3 Pages

Utilitarianism is one of the most commonly used ethical theories from the time it was formulated by Jeremy Bentham and John Stewart Mill in the nineteenth century. In his work, Utilitarianism, Bentham “sought to dispel misconceptions that morality has nothing to do with usefulness or utility or that morality is opposed to pleasure” (MacKinnon, 2012, p. 53). To simplify the utilitarian principle, which is one of utility, one can surmise that morality is equated with the greatest amount of utility or good for the greatest number of people (MacKinnon, 2012). Also, with its orientation to the “end or goal of actions” (MacKinnon, 2012, p. 54), Utilitarianism thus, espouses the consequentialist principle, e.g., the evaluation of any human …show more content…

Because we desire happiness, we thus know it is desirable or good (pp. 60-61). Even with this argument as presented by Mill, there are still questions that remain unanswered, e.g., What is it that people desire, do they desire to be happy or do “they desire what they think will bring them happiness” (MacKinnon, 2012, p. 61)? The criticisms presented thus far, on the “principle of utility as a correct moral principle” (MacKinnon, 2012, p. 60), leaves me to hold a moral judgment and answer to the question, “Utilitarianism: A Workable Moral Theory?” And as cited by Driver (2014) The influence of the Classical Utilitarians has been profound — not only within moral philosophy, but within political philosophy and social policy. The question Bentham asked, “What use is it?” is a cornerstone of policy formation. It is a completely secular, forward-looking question …show more content…

54), stirred two objections: 1) “The act that causes the greatest balance of pleasure over pain for the whole group might be grossly unjust toward some individuals and (2) It’s difficult or impossible to calculate pleasures and pains, and to combine these into a sum-total” (Gensler, n.d.). Thus, the simple calculation of the “greatest amount of happiness” (MacKinnon, 2012, p. 55) to be experienced by the greatest number of people, proved difficult to accept by the opponents of utilitarianism. This writer, for one, would argue that although happiness was touted by the utilitarian as the intrinsic good to be desired, the mode and object of happiness varied and viewed differently by individuals. As Mill elucidated Moreover, in most aspects of everyday life, a person will not be affecting large numbers of other people, and thus need not consider his or her actions in relation to the good of all, but only to the good of those involved. It is only the people who work in the public sphere and affect many other people who must think about public utility on a regular basis (Spark Notes,

Open Document