Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Happiness is our everyday life - essay
The major theory of ethics
The pursuit of happiness philosophy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
What is happiness? We usually refer to happiness as just an emotion but is that all it is? Jeremy Bentham is convinced that avoiding pain and seeking pleasure for the betterment of a community is the end, or the purpose of all human life. Bentham beliefs that happiness relies on pleasure, an idea that contradicts with my belief that happiness is an end onto itself, or self sufficient. I believe that if happiness is to be the sole purpose of man, as Bentham states in his collection of writings, then it should be the ultimate end, leading to nothing else. Therefore if happiness is self sufficient, it cannot rely on pleasure or pain to be man 's purpose because it relies on things outside of itself to make man happy. Bentham 's core ideas of happiness comes from the principle of utility. "The principle of utility is the foundation of the present work: it will be proper therefore at outset to give an explicit and determinate account of what is meant by it... By utility is meant that the property in any object whereby it tends to produce …show more content…
The principle of utility and ethics governed by pleasure and pain each seem flawed. How can all of our acts be good as long as we seeking pleasure for the greater community? That thought is too vague. That is a free pass to do anything you want as long as it brings people pleasure. Although he claims that he believes that ethics should be objective, the previous statement makes it subjective. Ethics, or morality, should be objective. Objective in a sense that there is a general principle that we each follow in our daily lives. Not to say that each situation requires the same response, but that some things are right and others are not and we need to hold ourselves accountable for the wrong things. Having subjective morals would allow everyone to individually decide if their actions were right. If this were the case there would be no basis to create and uphold any
Before we look into specifics, we’ll examine the history and development of “happiness” as a philosophy. Of course, the emotion of happiness has always existed, but it began to be seriously contemplated around 2,500 years ago by philosophers like Confucius, Buddha, Socrates and Aristotle. Shortly after Buddha taught his followers his Noble Eight Fold Path (which we will talk about later), Aristotle was teaching that happiness is “dependent on the individual” (Aristotle).
Bentham creates this with the hopes that it will end up changing laws in the society that seemed corrupt and useless to him, basing much of it on Hume’s idea of Social Utility. With his outlook, Utilitarianism was not about how you get your pleasure, nor about the overall quality of the act itself, but instead about gaining as much pleasure as you can in any way possible. Along with maximizing pleasure for oneself, it is stated in Stanford University’s paper on this subject they
As a result, three general characteristics were constituted as the basics of his philosophy: the greatest happiness principle, universal egoism and the artificial identification of one’s interests with those of others. The first discusses about producing the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Therefore, the utility principle is completely dependent on the amount of happiness brought about. It can be inferred that actions which don’t produce a content amount of happiness is morally
The principle of utility has evolved from an individual perspective to the general population. Jeremy Bentham, arguably the founder of utilitarianism, leaned towards hedoism and believed pleasure is the only intrinsic good and we should make choices based on the amount of pleasure we will receive. He was most interested in this concept on an individual level. The amount of pleasure or satisfaction we receive and pain or suffering we avoid from an action is the amount of utility it is determined to have. Bentham went so far as to invent hedonic calculus, which considers factors such as intensity, duration, certainty, remoteness, fecundity, amount of people affected, etc to determine an act's amount of utility. John Stewart Mill tried to counteract problems from Bentham's theory by using the greatest happiness principle which, “is not the agent's own greatest happiness, but the greatest amount of happiness altogether”. Mill dived deeper into which kind of pleasure is better and determined that you have to take the word of people who have experienced a myriad of different pleasures and observe what they choose after experiencing all of them. While utilitarianism may seem feasible in theory, it doesn't take into account personal integrity, the longterm affects of an action..... making it impractical for society to adopt.
Jeremy Bentham is widely regarded as the father of utilitarianism. He was born in 1748 into a family of lawyers and was himself, training to join the profession. During this process however, he became disillusioned by the state British law was in and set out to reform the system into a perfect one based on the ‘Greatest Happiness Principle,’ ‘the idea that pleasurable consequences are what qualify an action as being morally good’. Bentham observed that we are all governed by pain and pleasure; we all naturally aim to seek pleasure and avoid pain. He then decided that the best moral principle for governing our lives is one which uses this, the ‘Greatest Happiness Principle.’ This is that the amount of overall happiness or unhappiness that is caused by an action should determine whether an action is right or wrong. He stated,
Bentham’s Utilitarianism sees the highest good as the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Jeremy Bentham believed that by adding up the amounts of pleasure and pain for each possible act we should be able to choose the good thing to do. Happiness equaled pleasure minus pain. Bentham provided a way of measuring pleasure and pain, he called it the hedonic calculus. There are seven criteria to this calculus. First being the intensity being measured – how strong is the pleasure. The second criteria, duration – how long will the pleasure last. The third, certainty – how likely or unlikely is the pleasure. Fourth, Propinquity - How far off in the future is the pleasure or pain. The fifth, fecundity – what is the likely hood that a succession of pleasure will follow. The sixth criteria, purity – What is the probability that the pain will lead to other pain. Lastly, is the extent – how many people will be affected. This calculus gave Bentham a method of testing whether an action is morally right in that if it was good it would result in the most pleasurable outcome, having weighed up all the elements. These factors weigh up the potential amount of pleasure or pain which might arise from moral actions to decide which would be the best option to take. Ideally this formula should determine which act has the best tendency and is therefore
...ins more faults than he mentioned. I do agree to the principle of utility relative to maximizing happiness for the most amount of people possible. However, in regards to my example about the computerized system that sacrifices a healthy person to save the lives of other’s, the use of the principle would be morally and ethically wrong. Although people have the choice to become organ donors, in the example, the computer would be killing someone instead of using an already deceased person’s organs to save another’s life. This issue is an example of the differences between Kant and Mill, which I believe if combined can make Mill‘s theory better suited for real-life situations. Intentions are not always the most significant factors similarly to how results are not. Therefore, combining certain aspects of Kant’s theory with Mill’s would make Mill’s work more appropriate.
In The Principle of Utility Bentham argues that the aim of each action should be the greatest happiness of the greatest number (Rachels 2015). There are several forms of utilitarianism. Classical utilitarianism is hedonistic meaning that is concerned with the amount of happiness produced by a course of action. A hedonistic approach to happiness suggests that it consists in maximizing pleasure and minimizing
There comes a time where everyone is stuck in a position where the decision you have to make is based upon morals. “Should I do this or not”, “Is it right or not”, these are the questions that tend to frequently pop up. These decisions tend to be based off of pleasure being greater than the negative or sufferings. This particular moral decision that I will go over today is utilitarianism by John Stuart Mills a follow up on Jeremy Bentham’s utilitarianism. Jeremy Bentham’s philosophy of utilitarianism was that he that believed “happiness could be quantified with actual math to reach the ethical answer to any given problem.” While Mills believed in utilitarian mathematical calculation and it figures out how many people are affected by an action, how it affects them, and whether the action is moral or immoral.
He reasons that there must be higher and lower pleasures. He says this because if all pleasures were equal then human pleasure would be equal to that of an animal. He makes the point that no rational man would give up his human pleasure in order to partake in the pleasure that an animal feels. Therefore, higher pleasure must be intelligent pleasures since intelligence is what seperates man and beast. He also says that an educated man would never chose to be an uneducated man. No one would ever chose to be something that was ‘lower’ than them. Therefore he says that pleasure need to be looked at qualitative rather than quantitative. This is the main difference between Bentham and Mills; the other difference is that Mills focuses on society more than the individual. So the previous situation with the kid debating on whether or not to help the group, Mills would say to definitely help his group because it benefits the most people. Also Mills focuses quite a bit on the fact that rules that a government makes must be based on the principles of utility. That means that a government must make their rules thinking of everyone 's interests in mind. The reason the government must do that is because it is their duty to assist the individuals in society with achieving happiness because, as stated before the ultimate good is finding happiness. This can also be seen in American culture considering we are granted the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as stated in our Declaration of
Before the main discussion of the Bentham's utilitarianism gets underway, lets first establish what utilitarianism is. As stated in the introduction, utilitarianism is a teleological philosophy that is primarily concerned with the results of an action when determining the nature of that act. Utilitarianism operates primarily under the greater happiness principal, in other words, utilitarians believe that one should only act in such a way that the results of that act should produce the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest for the greatest number of people. It is due to this view that utilitarianism is often criticized for being too hedonistic because it places the moral value of an act only on how much that act effects happiness. The teleological nature of utilitarianism also can serve as a problem because it pays no attention to the intention an action and can make acts of an immoral nature justifiably right. I will use the example that a professor of mine used in which a man tries to snatch an old lady's purse and in his struggle to do so he pulls her out of the way of a speeding vehicle thus saving her life. This act, although it started with mischievous intent, ended with a life being saved and surely produced the greatest amount of happiness for the old lady. In the utilitarian eye this act is morally acceptab...
This principle promotes a life of more pleasure than pain by choosing actions that produce more happiness. These are conscious actions made that follow a life of utility and act in accordance with the “Greatest Happiness Principle.” Though Mill’s critics would argue that Utilitarianism is not a reasonable foundation for morality by not fulfilling a life of happiness, creating selfish or expedient people, and reducing human experience to animals, I would have to disagree. This principle promotes happiness and pleasure for all, along with aiding individuals to be less selfish, and an even slate for people of all characters. I find the “Greatest Happiness Principle” to be a relevant and altruistic foundation of morality. There is an emphasis on lives containing more pleasure than pain under the rule that one person cannot put their own happiness above others. I think a type of morality such as this would be more successful than other forms of morality because it wants every human life to be a life filled with more pleasure than pain. I see this as an appropriate foundation because it promotes good over bad, which is ultimately the function of morality as a whole. As written by Raymond Plant, “Since the principle of the individual is to try to satisfy his desires…the principle of society should be to try to advance the satisfactions of those who belong to the society…”
This extraordinary philosopher believed the only thing people wanted in life was to avoid pain and pursue all that may brings them pleasure. He devised four ends (In order of priority), which would promote utility: Subsistence, Abundance, Security and Equality. Bentham felt the greater enjoyment of these ends would result in a larger amount of social happiness. A major criticism Bentham was often faced with was his constant consideration of economic efficiency rather than that of his fellow man. This is obvious from his work on the poor law. Bentham felt charity was his end (idea on Houses of Industry) however economy was in fact his means of doing this . Bentham’s poor plan was seen as an attempt to avert the threats of the revolution and
The second thing that he believed is there must be two or more solutions when you face some troubles or problems. Under the theory of Utilitarianism, you need to look at both options, not only one way of thinking, and make a decision. Even if you focus on your act for leading to pleasant, eventually you should be always looking at consequence. He also believed that all people are motivated by pleasure and pain. His most famous policy was “greatest good for the greatest number”.
Happiness, what is it, and why do we strive to achieve it so persistently? Happiness in some points of view is portrayed as the state that is derived from self-awareness of a benefiting action or moment taking place. What of the moments that are not beneficial? Can a person still find moments of happiness and success in discord, a little glimmer of light shining from the deep recesses of our own consciousness? Plucking it from a mere moment, achieved from money, or is it so much more, happiness is the precipice that all strive to gain to better perceive their success. As a person lives, they are in a constant struggle to be happy. For instance, even the United States Constitution makes reference to the idea that every person has the inalienable right to pursue happiness. This was the resulting outcome of the enlightenment from France, spilling out into the rest of the world from 1650 through 1800. This revolutionized the idea that every single person has the inalienable right to happiness or in different views the right to succeed. As to how one peruses or conjures their happiness that is an entirely different concept and completely up to their preferred preference, but it is something that a person needs to find on their own for true success.