Utilitarianism

Utilitarian theory emerged in the late eighteenth century as a supposedly scientific alternative to natural rights theories. In Britain, during the nineteenth century, utilitarianism provided the basis for a wide range of social, political and legal reforms, advanced by the so-called Philosophic Radicals. Utilitarianism provided one of the major foundations for classical liberalism and remains perhaps the most important branch of moral philosophy, certainly in terms of its impact upon political issues.

Utilitarianism suggests that the ‘rightness’ of an action, policy or institution can be established by its tendency to promote happiness. This is based upon the assumption that individuals are motivated by self-interest and that these interests can be defined as the desire for pleasure, or happiness, and a wish to avoid pain. Individuals thus calculate the quantities of pleasure and pain that each possible action would generate, and choose whichever course promises the greatest amount of pleasure over pain. Utilitarian thinkers believe that it is possible to quantify pleasure and pain in terms of utility, taking account of their intensity, duration and so forth. Human beings are therefore utility maximizers, who seek the greatest possible pleasure and the least possible pain or unhappiness. The principle of utility can be applied to society at large using the classic nineteenth-century formula of ‘the greatest happiness for the greatest number’.

However, utilitarianism has developed into a cluster of theories. Classical utilitarianism is act-utilitarianism, in that it judges an act to be right if its consequences produces at least as much pleasure-over-pain as those of any alternative act. Rule-utilitarianism, rather, judges an act to be right if it conforms to a rule which, if generally followed, would produce good consequences. What is called utilitarian generalization assesses an act’s rightfulness not in terms of its own consequences, but on the basis of its consequences were the act to be universally performed. Motive-utilitarianism places emphasis upon the intentions of the actor rather than upon the consequences of each action.

The attraction of utilitarianism is its capacity to establish supposedly objective grounds on which moral judgements can be made. Rather than imposing values on society, it allows each individual to make his or her own moral choices as each alone is able to define what is pleasurable and what is painful. Utilitarian theory thus upholds diversity and freedom, and demands that we respect others as pleasure-seeking creatures. Its drawbacks are philosophical and moral. Philosophically, utilitarianism is based upon a highly individualistic view of human nature that is both asocial and ahistorical. It is by no means certain, for instance, that consistently self-interested behaviour is a universal feature of human society. Morally, utilitarianism may be nothing more than crass hedonism, a view expressed by J. S. Mill in his declaration that he would rather be ‘Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied’ (although Mill himself subscribed to a modified form of Utilitarianism). Utilitarianism has also been criticized for endorsing acts that are widely considered wrong, such as the violation of basic human rights, if they serve to maximize the general utility of society.

Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) A British philosopher and legal reformer, Bentham was the founder of utilitarianism and laid down the basis of philosophical radicalism. His moral and philosophical system, developed as an alternative to natural rights theory, was based upon the belief that human beings are rationally self-interested creatures who calculate pleasure and pain in terms of utility. Using the ‘greatest happiness’ principle, he developed a justification for laissez-faire economics, advocated a wide range of legal and constitutional reforms, and, in later life, supported political democracy in the form of universal manhood suffrage. Bentham’s major works include A Fragment on Government ([1776] 1948) and Introduction to Principles of Morals and Legislation ([1789] 1948).

James Mill (1773–1836) A Scottish philosopher, historian and economist, Mill helped to turn utilitarianism into a radical reform movement. Using Benthamite philosophy, he attacked mercantilism, the church, the established legal system and, especially, the system of aristocratic government. Mill supported what he called ‘pure democracy’ as the only means of achieving good government, defined as government in the interests of the governed, or at least in the interests of the ‘greatest number’. On this basis, he recommended a progressive widening of the franchise, frequent elections and a secret ballot. Mill’s best known work is Essay on Government (1820).

Peter Singer (1945– ) An Australian philosopher, Singer has employed utilitarianism to consider a range of political issues. He has argued in favour of animal welfare on the grounds that an altruistic concern for the well-being of other species derives from the fact that, as sentient beings, they are capable of suffering. Animals, like humans, have an interest in avoiding physical pain, and he therefore condemns any attempt to place the interests of humans above those of animals as ‘speciesism’. However, he accepts that altruistic concern does not imply equal treatment, and he does not accord animals rights. Singer has also used utilitarianism to justify increasing assistance from rich to poor countries. Singer’s major works include Animal Liberation (1975), Practical Ethics (1993) and How Are We to Live? (1993).