Jeremy Bentham and John Mill's Classical Utilitarianism

1183 Words3 Pages

In this essay I will analyse Jeremy Bentham and John Mill’s Classical Utilitarianism theory. I will present the objection that the expected impartiality of a moral agent is impractical and therefore seriously undermines the theory itself. This essay will focus on this opposition in order to determine whether or not such a theory can be salvaged through a possible modification.

Classical Utilitarianism is an ethical theory which promotes the moral decision as one which produces the most utility. Utility is often described as pleasure or happiness in consideration of both the individual and the world as a whole, and results in the greatest balance of pleasure over pain. Classical (or Act) Utilitarianism is closely related to the golden rule: “To do as you would be done by, and to love your neighbour as yourself, constitute the ideal perfection of utilitarian morality.” (Mill 1863) and is therefore approved by both religion and reason, even considered a secular version of Divine Command theory in which morality is subject to God and obedience to his commands. The theory is essentially a derivative of consequentialism and therefore the possible consequences of an action determine its morality, meaning in essence, the right action is the one which leads to the best outcome. A clear procedure in decision making is followed: identify the possible options, evaluate each potential act in terms of the amount of happiness produced, and act to maximise the balance of good over bad.

Although the idea of utilitarianism sounds ideal in terms of an ethical theory, we must examine the fact that all suppositions have their faults, and utilitarianism is no exception. Many objections have been provided against the theory, but one that appears ...

... middle of paper ...

...m as utility is only determined from the biased perspective of the agent. However, the theory may be saved if it is modified to include the influence of commitments to loved ones, whilst maintaining general impartiality. Consequently, Classical Utilitarianism with slightly less constrictive restraints surrounding impartiality can continue to be a viable moral theory despite this objection.

Works Cited

Mill, J.S. 1863. Utilitarianism. Retrieved online at http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/m/mill/john_stuart /m645u/chapter2.html. [17 March 2014].

Rachels, J & Rachels, S. 1986. The Elements of Moral Philosophy, 7th edn.

Baston, C.D. 1991. The Altruism Question: Toward a Social-psychological Answer. Hillsdale, NJ. Retrieved online at http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=bk97AgAAQBAJ&pg=PT110&source=gbs_ selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false. [31 March 2014].

Open Document