# Bentham's Utilitarianism Analysis

1444 Words 6 Pages
Jeremy Bentham, author of the “Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation” (1789), and one of the founding fathers of Utilitarianism aimed to question moral issues of good and evil by simplifying any quandary to one question, what solutions preserves the most happiness and avoids the most pain to the greater number of people?
Problem Bentham Addresses Bentham defines good as what is beneficial, and he defines bad as what is detrimental. Pleasure and happiness are synonymous to good, according to Bentham, as evil and pain relate to bad. Bentham’s Utilitarianism is defined as an obligation to promote the greater good to the most number of people, while at the same time, avoiding the bad even if it meant leading the unjust or
Intensity, or how strong? Duration, or how long? Certainty, or how sure? and Propinquity, or how soon? These are place holders, the “x” in algebra if you will, for circumstances which will be considered in the measurement of pain and pleasure. The two other dimensions Bentham’s calculus measured were: Fecundity, or how many more? And Purity, or how free from pain? Through these dimensions, Bentham was able to give a number information detailing how much pain and pleasure a person could receive from a certain act. Here’s an example of Bentham’s calculus: If my professor was to go to a party, and become intoxicated through the use of cocaine, he would feel pleasure. Let 's give him a number value to substitute that. If he started at 0 at the beginning of the night, while indulging with drugs his pleasure went up to 20. Later on he had intercourse with a woman, and his pleasure increased to 30. In the morning he woke up with a hangover and genital burns, which resulted in pain, decreasing his numeric pleasure by 35, leaving him at -5. He cancels class, so the students get the day off, which is pleasurable to them, so let 's give the students a 10 on the pleasure scale. Through this calculus, it is more beneficial for my professor to get high, have intercourse, and miss class, to myself and the rest of my classmates because we get a day …show more content…
There are many glaring holes in his hypothesi as well as a lack of significant proof behind his conclusions, other than vague definitions by default, and generalizations of a moral good.
I object Bentham’s theory of Utilitarianism and his belief that it is morally correct to preserve the greater good for the most number of people, while neglecting those who that “good” affects negatively.
His theory disregards the wants, needs, and pleasures of the minority of people by principle. That in itself is both unfair and unjust. Ironically cancelling out Bentham’s idea of a greater good, because what is good about people suffering? It is not morally, nor is it ethically correct to abandon the pleasures of a certain group of people, for the needs of a greater number of people.
Premises of My

• ## An Objective Value Theory: The Illegal Aspects Of Hedonism

Hedonism is an objective Value Theory which asserts that the only intrinsically valuable thing is pleasure. However, it does not mean pleasure in the sense it is typically thought of. Hedonists believe there are two types of pleasure: physical pleasure and attitudinal pleasure. Many people believe that physical pleasure is the important pleasure for modern Hedonists; however, this is not the case. Though physical pleasure may contribute to your attitudinal pleasure, they are not good in and of themselves.…

Words: 2068 - Pages: 9
• ## The Moral Theory Of Mill's Greatest Happiness Principles

Hence, Mill’s theory is false because as we can see in the above example it requires too much sacrifice from an individual. The theory is false because it is not realistic nor probable. It requires the individual following the principle to experience pain even though the whole point behind the theory is to have an absence of pain. In addition, there are several conflicting viewpoints within Mill’s theory. The first conflicting viewpoint in Mill’s theory is that his principle does not actually maximize utility.…

Words: 1145 - Pages: 5
• ## The Importance Of Man's Happiness In Honor

There are also reasons why there is not happiness in the external goods in power. Finally, Aquinas rejects these objections by stating that God only uses his power for good whereas people can use it for good or evil. It does not make them happy. Also, ruling many people would be bad if they make bad use of their power. Finally, servitude is obstacle for good power and that is why people avoid it.…

Words: 725 - Pages: 3
• ## John Stuart Mill Act Utilitarianism Analysis

In this paper, I will argue that John Stuart Mill’s, act-utilitarianism (AU), does not fulfill the complexities of a person’s virtues and the influence it has on their motives. AU claims that an action is right if it brings the greatest amount of happiness for the general well-being. Furthermore, Mill believes that the concept of morality contains two of the main utilities in the Greatest Happiness Principle: a person’s actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. This means that all other desires a person has are to fulfill these actions. Mills acknowledges that the overly simplistic idea of the Happiness Principle may cause human happiness to seem no more sophisticated…

Words: 972 - Pages: 4
• ## Pros And Cons Of Utilitarian Theory Reflects Consequentialism?

Even though what might happen after your action could be extreme, as long as it is benefiting the majority. Utilitarianism rejects moral codes or systems that are based on traditions, customs or beliefs. Instead, they believe in moral actions that can be justified based on how they contribute to human beings in a positive way. We look at overall pleasure, happiness, and satisfaction. There is a rule and act variation to this theory.…

Words: 1182 - Pages: 5
• ## Socrates View Of Ideas In Plato's Gorgias

On the other hand, he also does not believe the dream of communication should be perfect connection like it is in the semiotic view. The imperfection and confusion of communication is what allows for human emotion. Therefore, the only way to increase the “wiring” between connected humans is to become less human, which is impossible for a human. In Peters’ view, communication is accepted as a relatively weak form of transferring ideas, but humans have to make the most they can out of it because it is unchangeable. In Peters’ dream of communication, he highlighted this acceptance, “The task is to find an account of communication that erases neither the curiousness fact of otherness at its core and the possibility of doing things with words” (Peters…

Words: 770 - Pages: 4
• ## Ethical Criticism In Bernard Williams's Utilitarianism

(Hume). An opposing theory/criticism concerning Mill’s utilitarianism theory is negative responsibility. According to Utilitarianism, you are morally responsible for: (a) the things you could have done to maximize happiness, but didn 't do; (b) the things that you could have done to prevent others from doing something that could decrease their overall happiness; as well as for: (c) what you actually do to increase happiness. In utilitarianism, one is responsible for not only themselves, but as well as the happiness of the people around them. Utilitarianism is an unreasonably troublesome theory.…

Words: 1393 - Pages: 6
• ## Characteristics Of Ethical Egoism

Ethical egoism suggests that we should only act on behalf of our own self-interest, and that we should only concern ourselves with things that will benefit us directly or indirectly. This theory also suggests that we shouldn’t concern ourselves with our neighbors and their problems, but only our own. This theory differs from psychological egoism because it states that we should only care about ourselves instead of we can only care about ourselves. Being an ethical egoist has many flaws in my opinion and it is definitely a more shameful act in my eyes, and most likely in the eyes of many other people who consider themselves decent human beings. Being a proud follower of this theory is basically saying “screw everyone else because it doesn’t affect me.” which isn’t illegal, but it doesn’t exactly follow the basic human norms that many of us live by.…

Words: 1359 - Pages: 6
• ## The Ethical Views Of John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism

This is opposed to the idea that we should be judged on the final outcome which I believe does not do justice when determining a person’s character. Though Kant’s theory does not account for situational circumstances, it does allow us to make decisions of our own as it acknowledges that people have different opinions on many issues. While Mill’s theory acknowledges that we all work towards pleasure and happiness, it creates a leeway for immoral acts as long as the goal was achieved. Since there are situations in life that we cannot foresee I believe that one should be judged on their intentions, rather than the outcome of their actions as life can be extremely unpredictable. By judging a person’s ethical actions based on their intentions, rather than the outcome we will have a more sincere view on their character and…

Words: 1510 - Pages: 6
• ## Ethics: Kantian Deontological Ethics And Utilitarian Ethics

It shapes human actions since the reasons for doing a particular act is without the influence of desires and emotions. As opposed Kantian deontological ethics, utilitarianism ignores justice and is mutually impractical because it justifies clearly immoral things to be moral even when the motive was to cause harm. The main objection to utilitarianism is that it devalues individuals by basing the judgment on simply consequences (West 2). On the other hand, the objection of Kantian theory is that it does not help people distinguish between moral and non-moral issues because it more depends on standards that people cannot live up to. The ambiguity that rises is that Kant’s theory can only be performed because of the obligation and duty to do good.…

Words: 756 - Pages: 4