THEORY OF UTILITARIANISM BY
JEREMY BENTHAM
THEORY OF UTILITARIANISM
PRINCIPLES OF THE THEORY
ACT UTILITARIANISM
RULE UTILITARIANISM
TWO LEVEL UTILITARIANISM
MOTIVE UTILITARIANISM
NEGATIVE UTILITARIANISM, TOTAL UTILITARIANISM, & AVERAGE
UTILITARIANISM
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF THE THEORY OF UTILITARIANISM
THEORY OF UTILITARIANISM
MORAL STANDARD SHOULD BE PROMOTION OF THE
BEST LONG-TERM INTEREST OF EVERYONE CONCERNED
UTILITARIAN ACT IS THE ONE THAT PRODUCES THE
GREATEST RATIO OF GOOD TO EVIL FOR ALL
CONCERNED
CERTAIN ACTIONS ALMOST ALWAYS HAVE A GREAT
UTILITARIAN VALUE
THUS, GENERAL RULES ARE FORMULATED TO HELP US
THAT WE FOLLOW THESE RULES OF ACTION
…..CONTINUED…..
A FEW DOCTORS DECIDE THAT A NUMBER OF
EXPERIMENTS ON A FEW PEOPLE, EVEN IF MOST OF
THEM DIED, WOULD BE WORTH IF THEY COULD FIND A
CURE FOR A DISEASE THAT WOULD RELIEVE THE
SUFFERING OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. UTILITARIANISM
WOULD GIVE APPROVAL FOR SUCH BECAUSE IT
PRODUCES THE GREATEST GOOD FOR THE GREATEST
NUMBER OF PEOPLE.
PRINCIPLES
ACTIONS ARE RIGHT TO THE DEGREE
THEY TEND TO PROMOTE
THE GREATEST GOOD FOR THE GREATEST NUMBER
A TENDENCY TO AUGMENT OR DIMINISH HAPPINESS OR
PLEASURE
GREATEST NUMBER INCLUDES ALL WHO WERE AFFECTED
BY THE ACTION IN QUESTION
ALWAYS CHOOSE THAT WHICH HAS THE GREATEST UTILITY
ACT UTILITARIANISM
EACH INDIVIDUAL ACTION IS TO BE EVALUATED
EVALUATED IN TERMS OF THE UTILITY PRINCIPLE
WHEN FACED WITH A CHOICE, WE MUST CONSIDER THE LIKELY
CONSEQUENCES OF POTENTIAL ACTIONS
WE MUST CHOOSE TO DO WHAT WE BELIEVE WILL GENERATE
THE MOST PLEASURE
TO DETERMINE WHETHER A RULE SHOULD BE FOLLOWED:
ONE SHOULD LOOK AT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF IT WERE
CONSTANTLY FOLLOWED
…..CONTINUED…..
IMPORTANCE OF CONSISTENCY
IF ADHERENCE TO THIS RULE PRODUCES MORE
HAPPINESS, THEN, IT IS A RULE THAT MUST BE
FOLLOWED AT ALL TIMES
RULE UTILITARIANISM
BEHAVIOUR IS EVALUATED BY RULES
THAT, UNIVERSALLY FOLLOWED PRINCIPLES SHOULD LEAD
TO THE GREATEST GOOD FOR THE GREATEST NUMBER
THE GREATEST GOOD IS BEST SERVED BY THE MASSES
ITS WHEN THEY FOLLOW RULES OUT OF DUTY, AND
LEAVE THE DIFFICULT & SUBTLE CALCULATIONS TO
THOSE IN AUTHORITY
TWO LEVEL UTILITARIANISM
ONE SHOULD NORMALLY USE ‘INTUITIVE’ MORAL
THINKING
IT SHOULD BE IN FORM OF RULE UTILITARIANISM,
BECAUSE, IT USUALLY MAXIMIZES HAPPINESS
THERE ARE SOME TIMES WHEN WE MUST ASCEND TO A
HIGHER LEVEL OF REFLECTION IN ORDER TO DECIDE
WHAT TO DO, AND MUST THINK AS AN ACT
UTILITARIANISM WOULD
MOTIVE UTILITARIANISM
ITS HYBRID BETWEEN ACT UTILITARIANISM & RULE
UTILITARIANISM
IT ATTEMPTS TO DEAL REALISTICALLY WITH HOW
HUMAN BEINGS ACTUALLY FUNCTION
PSYCHOLOGICALLY
WE ARE INDEED PASSIONATE, EMOTIONAL CREATURES
WE DO MUCH BETTER WITH POSITIVE GOALS THAN WITH
NEGATIVE PROHIBITIONS
WE LONG TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY
NEGATIVE UTILITARIANISM, TOTAL
UTILITARIANISM, & AVERAGE UTILITARIANISM
NEGATIVE UTILITARIANISM
PROMOTES THE LEAST AMOUNT OF EVIL OR HARM
LEAST AMOUNT TO PREVENT THE GREATEST AMOUNT OF
SUFFERING FOR THE GREATEST NUMBER
TOTAL UTILITARIANISM
ADVOCATES MEASURING THE UTILITY OF A POPULATION BASED
ON THE TOTAL UTILITY OF ITS MEMBERS
OUR INITIAL MORAL TASK IT TO INCULCATE FEELINGS OF
UTILITARIANISM WITHIN OURSELVES
…..CONTINUED….
AVERAGE UTILITARIANISM
ADVOCATES MEASURING THE UTILITY OF A POPULATION
BASED ON THE AVERAGE UTILITY OF THAT POPULATION
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF THE THEORY
OF UTILITARIANISM
ITS NOT CLEAR WHAT THE OUTCOME OF AN ACTION
WILL BE, NOR IS IT ALWAYS POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE
WHO WILL BE AFFECTED BY IT
JUDGING AN ACTION BY THE OUTCOME IS THEREFOR
HARD TO DO BEFOREHAND
VERY DIFFICULT TO QUANTIFY PLEASURES FOR
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS
SINCE THE GREATEST GOOD FOR THE GREATEST
NUMBER IS DESCRIBED IN AGGREGATE TERMS, THAT
GOOD MAY BE ACHIEVED UNDER CONDITIONS THAT ARE
HARMFUL TO SOME
….CONTINUED….
THE THEORY FAILS TO RECOGNISE ANY INDIVIDUAL
RIGHTS
CASE STUDY
