Act Utilitarianism Essay

In this essay, I will be arguing the faults found in Jeremy Bentham’s theory of Act Utilitarianism by solidifying my position, with evidence, in support of John Stuart Mill’s reformulation. Jeremy Bentham, an English philosopher, highly regarded as the founder of modern Utilitarianism, established the Utilitarian Doctrine. The main proposition of Bentham’s Utilitarian Doctrine states: The highest principle of morality is to maximize happiness, the overall balance of pleasure and pain. Bentham believed that ”pleasure and pain” stood above all other moral considerations and endured the role as our “sovereign masters” (Sandell, 34). He justified actions as “good” if it led to an increase of pleasure, and “bad” if it led to an increase of pain.

Mill’s theory, Rule Utilitarianism, expressed that it was impractical to expect everyone to try to determine the balance of pleasure and pain for every act we perform, but rather that we should act on those principles which tend to bring about the greatest good for the greatest number on balance. He attempted to save Utilitarianism by reformulating it as a more humanitarian, less calculated doctrine (Sandell, 48). The differences have been characterized under two categories: Act Utilitarianism (Bentham, where we must evaluate each act on the overall outcomes of pleasure or pain) and Rule Utilitarianism (Mill, where we conform to rules that have shown overall to bring about the greatest amount of happiness). Although Bentham’s theory established a foundation for Utilitarianism, flawed principle views manifested immoral blemishes and imperfections. I will analyze these three main objections to Bentham’s “greatest happiness” principle: First, it reduces all actions of moral importance to a single scale of pleasure and pain. Second, it fails to reasonably calculate how much pleasure or pain is actually obtained from an action. Third, it does not provide sufficient moral consideration involving human

Bentham based his measurements of value and benefit off of the “Utilitarian Calculus”. The calculus is composed of a set of criterion: 1) Intensity— how much pleasure is evident. 2) Duration— or perpetuity of pleasure. 3) Certainty— establishes pleasure beyond doubt. 4) Propinquity— The nearness of the pleasure; will it be immediate or come fairly soon or will it be a delayed pleasure (Utilitarian Calculus handout). This concept proposes when we take some form of action, we then calculate whether that action will cause pleasure or not. Again, lets reference the Mignonette, take the cabin boy and add in three more, so we have equal sides. The men continue to eat the cabin boys. Does the magnified amount of pain now outweigh the crews pleasure? Or is it still the latter? Some may say that by using Bentham’s calculus we can measure pleasure, but in reality it is almost impossible to weigh up side by side with