JEREMY BENTHAM

Jeremy Bentham (1748 to 1892) was an English jurist, philosopher, and legal and social
reformer. He was a political radical and a leading theorist in Anglo – American philosophy of
law. He propounded the theory of utilitarianism and fair treatment of animals. He influenced the
development of liberalism.

Bentham was one of the most influential utilitarian. His influence spread all around the world,
through his and his students. These included his secretary and collaborator on the utilitarian
school of philosophy James Mill, James Mill’s son John Stuart Mill, and several political leaders.
He attributed his theory to Joseph Priestley.

He also suggested the procedure called Hedonistic or felicific calculus for estimating the moral
status of any action. Utilitarianism was revised and expanded by Bentham’s student, John Stuart
Mill.

He was also the staunch supporter of individual liberty and right to private property. Austin is
called the father of the analytical school but it is. Bentham, who deserves this title. Bentham also
advocated for the codification of laws and also advocated for the legislation.

Works of Bentham

Most of the writing of Bentham were never published in his own lifetime; much of that which
was published was prepared for publication by others. Works published in Bentham’s lifetime
included:

 Fragment on Government (1776). This was an unsparing criticism of some introductory

passages relating to political theory in William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the laws
of England.

 Introduction to principles of Morals and Legislation ( printed for publication 1780,

published 1789)
  Defence of Usury (1787)

 Panopticon (1787, 1791)

 Emancipate your colonies (1793)

 Traite de legislation civile et penale (1802)

Principle of Utility

Utility was defined by Bentham as “the principle which approves or disapproves of every action
whatever according to the tendency which it appears to have to augment or diminish the
happiness of the party whose interest is in question”. The principle of utility is designed to
promote the happiness of the individual or the community. The community can have no interests
independents of or aggressive to the interests of the individual. According to Bentham,
community interest is sum of the interests of the members who compose it.

According to him the business of the government was to promote happiness among the masses,
by furthering the enjoyment of pleasure and providing security against the pain. For him it was
the greatest happiness of the greatest number of the people, which constituted the principle of
utility. A happy society constitutes a happy polity. Public good is the object of the legislator.

To know the true good of the community is science of legislation and finding the means to
realize that good constitutes the art of legislation. According to his theory, mankind is always
under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. They point out what we ought
to do, as well as to determine what we shall do. They govern us in all our actions and thoughts.
In words a man may pretend to reject their the empire: but in reality he will remain subject to it
all the while. The principle of utility recognizes this subjection, and assumes it for the foundation
of that system, the object of which is to nurture the fabric of felicity by the hands of reason and
of law.
The Benthamite legislator, seeking to ensure happiness for the community must strive to attain
four goals of subsistence, abundance, equality, and security citizens. He referred all these goals
as the function of law. The goal of security was paramount and principal one. Next to security,
he gave emphasis to the goal of equality.

Bentham never questioned the desirability of economic individualism and private property. The
law, according to him, can do noting to provide directly for the subsistence of the citizens. It can
impose penalty or give rewards, which indirectly act as the force behind the subsistence of the
individual. He did not force for the limitations on state interventions and social reforms.

By the principle of utility approves or disapproves of every action whatever according to

tendency it appears to have to enhance or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in
question.

Introduction

Utilitarianism is an English philosophy. It is a theory of morality. It is a tradition of ethical

philosophy. It advocates actions that foster happiness or pleasure and opposes actions that cause
unhappiness or harm, when directed toward making social, economic, or political decisions. A
utilitarian philosophy would aim for the betterment of society as a whole. It would say that an
action is right if it results in the happiness of the greatest number of people in a society or a
group.

Utilitarianism considers the interests of all humans equally. Though Utilitarianism is one of the
most powerful and persuasive approaches to normative ethics in the history of philosophy. But
this concept was not articulated until the 19th Century.

Origin

The traces regarding utilitarianism can be found in ancient Greek Philosophy

 The ancient Greek philosopher and hedonists Aristippus and Epicurus viewed that the
happiness as the only good for well being of the people. Later this idea became
principle/doctrine and
 Scottish philosopher David Hume became the founder of Utilitarianism.
  English philosopher Joseph Priestly vigorously advocated the utilitarianism.
 Scottish philosopher Francis Hutcheson (in his book A system of moral philosophy') was
the first to use the formula of the greatest happiness of greatest number'.
 More over Cumberland, Shaftesbury, John Gay etc also supported the concept of
utilitarianism.
 English philosopher Jeremy Bentham made a systematic exposition of utilitarianism. He
made it most popularized. Later it was famously known as Bentham's School'. So, the
entire of popularizing Utilitarianism theory goes to Bentham, for giving a systematic
exposition of this theory, and making it widely known and its conceptions,
characteristics.
 J.S.Mill improved and modernized utilitarian approach to political obligation by
inducting qualitative aspect of its substance.

However, utilitarianism substitutes absolute empiricism for absolute idealism and

promotes egalitarian concept.

Meaning

 Utility means the quality or state of being used; the quality to satisfy human wants; a
public utility, a service provided by one of these.
 Utilitarianism means the doctrine, expounded by Jeremy Bentham, that the moral and
political rightness of an action is determined by its utility, defined as its contribution to
the greatest good of the greatest number.

Utilitarian approach to political obligation means the habitual obedience of the people to the laws
of the state because of its utility to promote the general happiness of the greatest number of
people. Utilitarianism is hedonistic, pragmatic and altruistic. According to G.H.Sabine, the
philosophical radicals hold that utilitarianism is the only guide to private morals and public
policy. Utilitarianism is its sole justification. Utility is the basis of Government.
Objectives of the State according to Utilitarianism

In the utilitarian State, political obligation depends upon the objectives of the State. When the
State sought to promote general welfare of the people, the people are obliged to obey the laws
made by the state.

The State exists for the individual. But the individual does not exist for the state. Therefore, the
state cannot absorb the individual. That means it is not purely supports individualism and ealism.

The main object of the utilitarianism is enlightened benevolence

Enlightened Benevolence

Everyone seeks pleasure and avoids pain. Utilitarianism has an ethical appeal. Reason reconciles
self – regarding and other regarding impulses of individual. Utilitarian approach to political
obligation does not separate individual from the society. It blends the individual happiness with
the happiness of others. This is called the philosophy of Enligtened Benevolence.

There are three principles that serve as the basic axioms of utilitarianism.05:49 

Demonstrate Engineering Principles With Marshmallows

1. Pleasure or Happiness Is the Only Thing That Truly Has Intrinsic Value.

Utilitarianism gets its name from the term "utility," which in this context does not mean "useful"
but, rather, means pleasure or happiness. To say that something has intrinsic value means that it
is simply good in itself. A world in which this thing exists, or is possessed, or is experienced, is
better than a world without it (all other things being equal). Intrinsic value contrasts with
instrumental value. Something has instrumental value when it is a means to some end. For
example, a screwdriver has instrumental value to the carpenter; it is not valued for its own sake
but for what can be done with it.
Now Mill admits that we seem to value some things other than pleasure and happiness for their
own sake—we value health, beauty, and knowledge in this way. But he argues that
we never value anything unless we associate it in some way with pleasure or happiness. Thus, we
value beauty because it is pleasurable to behold. We value knowledge because, usually, it is
useful to us in coping with the world, and hence is linked to happiness. We value love and
friendship because they are sources of pleasure and happiness.

Pleasure and happiness, though, are unique in being valued purely for their own sake. No other
reason for valuing them needs to be given. It is better to be happy than sad. This can't really be
proved. But everyone thinks this.

Mill thinks of happiness as consisting of many and varied pleasures. That's why he runs the two
concepts together. Most utilitarians, though, talk mainly of happiness, and that is what we will do
from this point on.

2. Actions Are Right Insofar as They Promote Happiness, Wrong Insofar as They Produce
Unhappiness.

This principle is controversial. It makes utilitarianism a form of consequentialism since it says

that the morality of an action is decided by its consequences. The more happiness is produced
among those affected by the action, the better the action is. So, all things being equal, giving
presents to a whole gang of children is better than giving a present to just one. Similarly, saving
two lives is better than saving one life.

That can seem quite sensible. But the principle is controversial because many people would say
that what decides the morality of an action is the motive behind it. They would say, for instance,
that if you give $1,000 to charity because you want to look good to voters in an election, your
action is not so deserving of praise as if you gave $50 to charity motivated by compassion, or a
sense of duty.
3. Everyone's Happiness Counts Equally.

This may strike you as a rather obvious moral principle. But when it was put forward by
Bentham (in the form, "everyone to count for one; no-one for more than one") it was quite
radical. Two hundred years ago, it was a commonly held view that some lives, and the happiness
they contained, were simply more important and valuable than others. For example, the lives of
enslavers were more important than enslaved people; the well-being of a king was more
important than that of a peasant.

So in Bentham's time, this principle of equality was decidedly progressive. It lay behind calls on
the government to pass policies that would benefit all equally, not just the ruling elite. It is also
the reason why utilitarianism is very far removed from any kind of egoism. The doctrine does
not say that you should strive to maximize your own happiness. Rather, your happiness is just
that of one person and carries no special weight.

Utilitarians like the Australian philosopher Peter Singer take this idea of treating everyone
equally very seriously. Singer argues that we have the same obligation to help needy strangers in
far-off places as we have to help those closest to us. Critics think that this makes utilitarianism
unrealistic and too demanding. But in "Utilitarianism," Mill attempts to answer this criticism by
arguing that the general happiness is best served by each person focusing primarily on
themselves and those around them.

Bentham's commitment to equality was radical in another way, too. Most moral philosophers
before him had held that human beings have no particular obligations to animals since animals
can't reason or talk, and they lack free will. But in Bentham's view, this is irrelevant. What
matters is whether an animal is capable of feeling pleasure or pain. He doesn't say that we should
treat animals as if they were human. But he does think that the world is a better place if there is
more pleasure and less suffering among the animals as well as among us. So we should at least
avoid causing animals unnecessary suffering.
Principles Adverse to that of Utility

A principle may be different from that of utility in two ways:

i. By being constantly opposed to it as in the case of a principle of asceticism.

ii. By being sometimes opposed to it, and sometimes not as in a case of the principle of
sympathy and antipathy.

Principle of Sympathy and Antipathy

By the principle of sympathy and antipathy, Bentham meant that principle which approves or
disapproves of certain actions, not on account of their tending to augment the happiness or an
account of their tending to diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question.

This principle meant the approbation or disapprobation of certain action by a man on ground that
a man finds himself inclined to approve or disapprove of them, holding up that approbation or
disapprobation as a sufficient reason for itself, and denying the necessity of looking out for any
extrinsic ground. The quantum of punishment, based on this principle, dictates to punish less if
man hates that action less more if he hates it more.

The principle of sympathy and antipathy is most apt to err on the side of severity. It is for
applying punishment in many cases which deserve none: in many cases which deserve some, it is
for applying more than they deserve. There is no incident imaginable, be it ever so trivial, and so
remote from mischief, from which this principle may not extract a ground of punishment.

Pleasures and pains

Bentham has referred the pains and pleasures by one general word, interesting perceptions.
Interesting perceptions are either simple or complex. The simple ones are those which cannot be
resolved into more: complex are those which are resolvable into divers simple ones. A complex
interesting perception may accordingly be composed either:

1. Of pleasures alone
 2. Of pains alone

3. Of a pleasure or pleasures and a pain or pains together.

Several simple pleasures

The simple pleasures, according to Bentham, include:

 The pleasures of sense

 The pleasures of wealth

 The pleasures of skill

 The pleasures of amity

 The pleasures of a good name

 The pleasures of power

 The pleasures of piety

 The pleasures of benevolence

 The pleasures of malevolence

 The pleasures of memory

 The pleasures of imagination

 The pleasures of expectation

 The pleasures dependent on association

 The pleasures of relief

Conclusion

Bentham’s contributed his best in the creation of a “Pannomion”, a complete Utilitarian code of
law. Bentham not only proposed many legal and social reforms, but also expounded an
underlying moral principle on which they should be based. This philosophy, utilitarianism,
argued that the right act or policy was that which would cause “the greatest happiness of the
greatest number” often referred to as the principle of utility.

Though he supported the state interventions and reforms, he was a staunch supporter of
individualism and private property ownerships. Utilitarianism was revised and expanded by
Bentham’s student, John Stuart Mill. Bentham’s theory, unlike Mill’s faces several criticisms.