Utilitarian Concept of Jeremy Bentham

Utilitarianism as an ethical theory was developed by Jeremy Bentham within the psychological and philosophical framework of British empiricism. Bentham was inspired by the ideas of David Hume for his understanding of classical British empiricism. He was mainly a reformer whose chief concern was the formulation of ethical doctrine which would serve as a guide in the moral conduct of the individual in society. Bentham was an advocate of psychological hedonism. He says, Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as what we shall do. The motive in prospect is always some pleasure or some pain. A motive is substantially nothing more than pleasure or pain operating in a certain manner. Thus according to Bentham, pleasure and pain are the only possible motives to action. Human beings are intended to seek maximum pleasure and avoid pain.

Hedonistic Calculus
Bentham believes in hedonistic calculus. He devised a method for the measurement of pleasure and pain. He says, weigh pleasure and weigh pains, and as the balance stands, will the question of right and wrong. An action is right if it gives pleasure or excess of pleasure over pain. An action is wrong if it gives pain or excess of pain over pleasure. Thus Bentham gives a purely hedonistic criterion of right and wrong. In calculating pleasure and pains we must take into account their intensity, duration, proximity, certainty, purity, fecundity, and extent. Benthams hedonism is altruistic because he takes into account the extent of pleasures, i.e., and the number of person affected by them. If a pleasure is shared by many persons, it has greater extent and can be preferred on such pleasure enjoyed by less people. Thus Bentham by introducing extent as a dimension of pleasure gives place to altruism in his doctrine. Bentham holds the view that the only standard of appraisal of pleasure is quantitative.

But quantity takes different forms. It has seven dimensions of value, viz., and 1.Intensity; if one pleasure is more intense than another, the more intense pleasure is given preference to a less intense pleasure. 2. Duration; one pleasure is more durable than other. Of pleasure otherwise equal, the more durable pleasure is preference over the lesser one. 3. Proximity; a proximate pleasure is preferable to a remote pleasure. 4. Certainty; a certain pleasure is preferable to an uncertain pleasure. 5. Purity; a pleasure is pure when it is free from pain; and it is impure when it is mixed with pain. A pure pleasure is preferable to an impure pleasure. 6. Fecundity; a pleasure is said to have fecundity when it gives rise to a number of other pleasures. A fecund pleasure is given preference over the barren pleasure which does not give rise to other pleasure. 7. Extent; a pleasure may be enjoyed by a small number of persons. A pleasure of greater extent is preferable to lesser one. A pleasure enjoyed by a small number of persons is preferable to pleasure enjoyed by a small number of persons.

Benthams moral sanctions

Bentham accounts for the transition from egoism to altruism in the following manner. He explains it by means of four external sanctions, Physical or natural sanction, Political sanction, Social sanction and Religious sanction. They operate through the pleasures and pains caused by nature, the state, the society, and God to an individual and, compel him to be altruistic.

Physical Sanction
The physical sanction is constituted by the physical pains, which result from the disregard of natural law, such as the laws of health.

It is law of nature that we should satisfy the appetites moderately; if we violate it by their over indulgence, the violation is followed by diseases and pains.

Political sanction
The political sanction consists of those pains which follow upon the penalties inflicted by the authorities of state. The ideal of these pains prevents the individual from violating political laws and the hope of reward from the state prompts him to perform actions that are beneficial to the society.

Social sanction
The social sanction consists of those pains which follow upon the penalties inflicted by society upon the individual. E.g. ostracism; the fear of being out of community prevents prevent the individual to commit such act which is not conformity to society.

Religious sanction
The religious sanction includes the fear of punishment in hell and the hope of reward in heaven. Thus the external sanction is merely external pressures brought to bear upon the individuals so as to compel him to sacrifice his own interests to those of society. Bentham says, pleasures and pains which may be expected to issue from the physical, political, or social sanctions, must all of them be expected to be experienced in the present life; those which may be expected to issue from the religious sanction, may be expected to be experienced either in the present life or in a future.

John Stuart Mill on Utilitarianism

Mills concept of Utilitarianism can be summarized in the following five statements ;( a) pleasure is the only thing that is desirable. (B) The only proof that a thing is desirable is the fact that people do actually desire it. (C) Each persons own pleasure or happiness is a good to that person, so the general happiness is a good to everybody. (D) Men do desire other objects, but they desire them as a means to pleasure. (E) If one of two pleasures is preferred by those who are competently acquainted with both we are justified in saying that this preferred pleasure is superior in quality to the other. The Utilitarianism of J.S.Mill is called refined or qualitative hedonism. He says The creed which accepts as the foundation of moral utility, or the greatest happiness principle, holds that action are right if they tend to promote happiness and wrong if they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. Mill gives a hedonistic criterion of right and wrong. Pleasure is not the direct object of desire, but the consequence of fulfillment of desire. The more we seek pleasure the less we get it. The quality of pleasure is no other than the moral quality in disguise. Those pleasures are qualitatively superior which are approved by reason or higher moral nature. Mill introduces an element of rationalism into his doctrine by recognizing qualitative distinction of pleasure. Mill says, few human creatures would consent to be changed into any of the lower animals for a promise of the fullest allowance of beast pleasure: no intelligent human being would consent to be fool, no instructed person would be an ignoramus. He admits therefore that men sometimes desire something other than pleasure. What makes them think the pleasures of the intellect superior to those of a beast is not their intensity as pleasures but their superior nobleness or moral elevation.

If some pleasures are preferable to others on account of their quality as distinct from their quantity or intensity, then the Hedonistic theory is abandoned because something other than pleasure in all its degrees of intensity and duration is preferred.

Rational Utilitarianism of Henry Sidgwick

Henry Sidgwick is an exponent of intuitional or Rational Utilitarianism. He was of the view that pleasure is the only intrinsic value, which is good in itself. Pleasure is ultimately desirable. Pleasure is the only rational object of desire. It is the overt manifestation of conscience or moral reason. Sedgwick says, The ultimate standard of moral valuation is the productivity of desirable consciousness and the ultimate good or end in itself must be goodness or excellence of conscious life, and the goodness of conscious life must ultimately consist in happiness or pleasantness, and all other things called good are only means to the end of making conscious life more desirable. Pleasure or happiness is the ultimate good. Knowledge, beauty and other objects which are considered by some to have intrinsic value are only means to happiness. They have no value apart from happiness produced by them. Prudence, Benevolence and justice are the three rational principles of the distribution of happiness in our individual and social life. The axiom of rational benevolence is that the good of any one individual is of no more importance from the point of the view of the universe than the good of any other. It tells us that the pleasure of others ought to be regarded as of equal weight with our own. We should be impartial to the happiness of all persons. We should not prefer our own smaller happiness to the greater happiness of others. Sedgwick states that it is an intuition of conscience or practical reason that pleasure or happiness is the highest good. It is the manifestation of practical reason. The highest good, according to Sedgwick is sentient in nature; it consists in a desirable state of consciousness called pleasure or happiness. But knowledge of it is given by rational intuition, and not by experience. Thus Sedgwick advocates Rational Utilitarianism as distinguished from Bentham and J.S.Mills Empirical Utilitarianism.

Acknowledgement
I wish to thank Mr. S.K.Maharana my esteemed and learned teacher for providing me manifold assistance and advice while I was making this project. Without his kind help it couldnt have been possible to make this project. I would like to thank librarian and staff for suggesting me helpful books. The more comprehensive class notes are proved to be panacea for all the doubts raised in this project. I would like to thank my friends and classmates for comprehensive and fruitful discussion over the project.

Table of Contents
1. Utilitarian concept of Jeremy Bentham 2. Hedonistic Calculus 3. Benthams moral Sanction 4. Physical Sanction 5. Political Sanction 6. Social sanction 7. Religious Sanction 8. J.S.Mill on Utilitarianism 9. Rational Utilitarianism of Henry Sedgwick

Conclusion
Utilitarianism is an effort to provide an answer to the practical question what ought a man to do? Its answer is that he ought to act so as to produce the best consequences possible. In the notion of consequences the Utilitarian includes all of the good and bad produced by the act, whether arising after the act has been performed or during its performance. According to Mill, acts should be classified as morally right or wrong only if the consequences are of such significance that a person would wish to see the agent compelled to act in the preferred manner. In assessing the consequences of actions, Utilitarianism relies upon some theory of intrinsic value. Something is held to be good in it, apart from further consequences, and all other values are believed to derive their worth from their relation to this intrinsic good as a means to an end. Bentham and Mill were hedonists; i.e., they analyzed happiness as a balance of pleasure over pain. Utilitarians also assume that it is possible to compare the intrinsic values produced by two alternative actions and to estimate which would have better consequences. Bentham believed that a hedonic calculus is theoretically possible. A moralist, he maintained, could sum up the units of pleasure and the units of pain for everyone likely to be affected, immediately and in the future, and could

take the balance as a measure of the overall good or evil tendency of an action. Such precise measurement as Bentham envisioned is perhaps not essential, but it is nonetheless necessary for the Utilitarian to make some interpersonal comparisons of the values of the effects of alternative courses of action. Thus, in Toto, Utilitarianism was not very much a practical concept, but the concept was accepted by most of the people of that time even though it came up with a number of limitations. The concept of utilitarianism flourished only due to involvement of the concept of pleasure and happiness in it as it focused on maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain.