Act Utilitarianism

Jeremy Bentham

Bentham's theory of Act Utilitarianism is devised from empirical observation, and is thus supported by evidence. Bentham had a scientific mind, and believed that the study of ethics should be undertaken in a practical way. His theories led to extensive social reform, within criminal justice, the jury system, prison, saving banks and cheap postage. He considers the good of all people and the laws that were made as a result do the same.

17b05777-da39-486e-b073-50576500a8dd (image/jpg)

Caption: : "Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure."

Act Utilitarianism

Bentham defended the 'principle of utility' or the 'greatest happiness principle,' which dictates the morality of a given action depending on the amount of pleasure or happiness the outcome produces. As such, an action is right if it leads to the greatest happiness for all those it affects. Otherwise, the action is wrong.  Our actions aren't judged in terms of what they are (lying, stealing etc.) but by what consequences they have.  The term 'greatest happiness' is comparative. If an action leads to the greatest happiness of all those it affects, no other action taken at that time could have led to greater happiness. Therefore, an action is only right if, out of all the actions you could have taken, this action produces more happiness than any other. Just causing more happiness than unhappiness isn't enough for an action to be morally right.

8e229fc4-f46f-4e67-9976-be1b92d6be44 (image/jpg)

Caption: : The principle of utility is "that principle which states the greatest happiness of all those whose interest is in question, as being the right and proper... end of human action." - Jeremy Bentham

As Bentham argued that we should focus on maximising the amount of pleasure in our lives, we must have a means of measuring or quantifying pleasure, so he devised the 'Hedonic Calculus' for this purpose.

How do we calculate pleasure?

7cc6be91-f86b-4d88-854b-ddf16b3d7120 (image/jpg)

Caption: : "Quantity of pleasure being the same, pushpin is as good as poetry." - Jeremy Bentham

Hedonic Calculus

Purity - The probability and degree of pain diluting the pleasure. e.g) Raising a child is a pleasure, but the physical pain of childbirth can dilute this pleasure. Richness (Fecundity) - The likelihood of an action being followed by similar actions. e.g) Giving to charity or volunteering Remoteness (Propinquity) - How near or remote, in time or place, the benefits of the act. e.g) When giving to charity, the donor cannot directly see the benefits of their donation. Intensity - The amount of pleasure produced by an action. e.g) A teenager staying out late may be pleasurable, but it may be more pleasurable in the long run to come home earlier for both the parent and the teenager.

Certainty - The likelihood or probability of pleasure resulting from the act. e.g) School work is particularly pleasurable now, but it will become beneficial perhaps at university or at work. Extent - How widespread the pleasure will be. (Mill's addition) e.g) Capital punishment causes pleasure to the victim's family and to strict rule utilitarians, not to people who disagree with it. Duration - The length of time the pleasure is likely to last. e.g) Pleasure from sex isn't likely to last very long, but the pleasure of having a child is likely to last a lot longer.

Note-Worthy Points

Rule of thumb: if a decision greatly resembles a previous decision, you can use it as a 'rule of thumb' to avoid doing a detailed Hedonic Calculus again. The theory aims to reduce pain first, then increase the pleasure.

"Everyone to count for one, and no-one to count for more than one." - Jeremy Bentham If your act has good consequences, but will create a precedent for bad things in the future, do not do that. 

Strengths of Act Utilitarianism

The Hedonic Calculus is very flexible to work out the usefulness of each course of action, and as we assess each situation individually, we can assess it according to our own pain and pleasures. The rule of thumb means we can use pre-calculated courses of action, which means it is slightly more practical for use in business, and in cases where consequences are unpredictable, incalculable or immeasurable. Reducing pain before increasing pleasure is good because, it ensures that no one is suffering, whilst others are enjoying themselves - advocates equality. The method of the Hedonic Calculus is a quantitative element of the theory, which makes if more objective and scientific. 

The fact that everyone is considered equally important is key, because in the society Bentham was in, only the rich got access to good medical care and education, and the poorer classes didn't. Even today, there are people who think that status and power can make people more important than others. Bentham is advocating human equality. The precedent rule is similar to rule utilitarianism, as Bentham recognises the need for rules in our society. Act utilitarianism provides a clear and simple way of making decisions (consider the consequences of the different actions). It makes complex decisions easier, as the only thing that matters is happiness. 

The problems with Act Utili.

It is difficult to know all the consequences of an action, or how much pleasure it will cause, as everyone finds different things pleasurable. Humans desire a range of things, not just pleasure, and some people actively seek pain. Just because we desire pleasure, it doesn't mean it is right to live our lives actively seeking it.  John Stuart Mill said that happiness was too complex and indefinite to apply to specific situations. We shouldn't need to apply the principle of utility directly to actions, as humans have defined general rules or secondary principles through trial and error (e.g. don't lie, keep your promises). He says that only if the secondary principles contradict each other (e.g. if telling the truth means you break your promise) should we apply it to specific situations.

The argument of quality over quantity of pleasure was put forward by Mill, but having all the values the same makes calculation easier. Happiness can be derived from another person's pain. No type of action is ruled out as immoral. For instance, if torturing a child leads to the greatest happiness, then it is right to torture the child. The Hedonic Calculus is impractical, as you cannot assess the effects of every moral action you make. It's impossible to know all possible outcomes of an action, or to work out all the people who will be involved/impacted by your decision.  It is difficult to equate pain and pleasure as they are subjective terms, not objective and discrete numbers.

Integrity and demandingness My happiness doesn't count anymore than anyone else's, despite that I will be more deeply affected by my actions than anyone else. Act utilitarianism might allow actions that contradict with people's moral conscience and integrity (e.g. child abuse) It will never be right to do something for myself if I have more than the bare minimum. (e.g. money could buy a CD or food for people in poverty)

More Criticism (Sorry Jeremy)

f4db8974-5d30-4526-b149-32bc5f1fbc76 (image/jpg)

A solution to the problem?

Bentham says that an action is right according to 'the tendency which it appears to have' to maximise happiness, therefore we do not need to work out the precise consequences. If it is probable that someone will find out about the child abuse, many people will be unhappy, so torturing children is wrong as it will eventually lead to great unhappiness. HOWEVER, the theory still says that if it was unlikely that other people would find out, the abuse is still okay, as they cannot be unhappy about something they don't know about.

64e86c65-6b2c-4f86-afba-357b7e1be51e (image/jpg)