First published in 1833. Excerpt: It is no light task to give an abridged view of the philosophical
opinions of one, who attempted to place the vast subjects of
morals and legislation upon a scientific basis: a mere outline is
all that can be attempted.
The first principles of Mr. Bentham's philosophy are these--that
happiness, meaning by that term pleasure and exemption from
pain, is the only thing desirable in itself; that all other things are
desirable solely as means to that end; that the production,
therefore, of the greatest possible happiness is the only fit
purpose of all human thought and action, and consequently of
all morality and government; and moreover, that pleasure and
pain are the sole agencies by which the conduct of mankind is
in fact governed, whatever circumstances the individual may be
placed in, and whether he is aware of it or not.
Mr. Bentham does not appear to have entered very deeply into
the metaphysical grounds of these doctrines; he seems to have
taken those grounds very much upon the showing of the
metaphysicians who preceded him. The principle of utility, or as
he afterward called it, "the greatest-happiness principle," stands
no otherwise demonstrated in his writings than by an
enumeration of the phrases of a different description which
have been commonly employed to denote the rule of life, and
the rejection of them all, as having no intelligible meaning,
further than as they may involve a tacit reference to
considerations of utility. Such are the phrases "law of nature",
"right reason", "natural rights", "moral sense." All of these Mr.
Bentham regarded as mere covers for dogmatism, excuses for
setting up one's own ipse dixit as a rule to bind other people.
It is no light task to give an abridged view of the philosophical opinions of one, who attempted to place the vast subjects of morals and legislation upon a scientific basis: a mere outline is all that can be attempted.
The first principles of Mr. Bentham's philosophy are these--that happiness, meaning by that term pleasure and exemption from pain, is the only thing desirable in itself; that all other things are desirable solely as means to that end; that the production, therefore, of the greatest possible happiness is the only fit purpose of all human thought and action, and consequently of all morality and government; and moreover, that pleasure and pain are the sole agencies by which the conduct of mankind is in fact governed, whatever circumstances the individual may be placed in, and whether he is aware of it or not.
Mr. Bentham does not appear to have entered very deeply into the metaphysical grounds of these doctrines; he seems to have taken those grounds very much upon the showing of the metaphysicians who preceded him. The principle of utility, or as he afterward called it, "the greatest-happiness principle," stands no otherwise demonstrated in his writings than by an enumeration of the phrases of a different description which have been commonly employed to denote the rule of life, and the rejection of them all, as having no intelligible meaning, further than as they may involve a tacit reference to considerations of utility. Such are the phrases "law of nature", "right reason", "natural rights", "moral sense." All of these Mr. Bentham regarded as mere covers for dogmatism, excuses for setting up one's own ipse dixit as a rule to bind other people. "They consist, all of them," says he, "in so many contrivances for avoiding the obligation of appealing to any external standard, and for prevailing upon the reader to accept the author's sentiment or opinion as a reason for itself."
This, however, is not fair treatment of the believers in other moral principles than that of utility: All modes of speech are employed in an ignorant manner, by ignorant people; but no one who had thought deeply and systematically enough to be entitled to the name of a philosopher, ever supposed that his own private sentiments of approbation and disapprobation must necessarily be well- founded, and needed not to be compared with any external standard. The answer of such persons to Mr. Bentham would be, that by an inductive and analytical examination of the human mind, they had satisfied themselves that what we call our moral sentiments (that is, the feelings of complacency and aversion we experience when we compare actions of our own or other people with our standard of right and wrong), are as much part of the original constitution of man's nature as the desire of happiness and the fear of suffering; that those sentiments do not indeed attach themselves to the same actions under all circumstances, but neither do they, in attaching themselves to actions, follow the law of utility; but certain other general laws, which are the same in all mankind, naturally, through education or external circumstances may counteract them, by creating artificial associations stronger than they. No proof indeed can be given that we ought to abide by these laws, but neither can any proof be given that we ought to regulate our conduct by utility. all that can be said is that the pursuit of happiness is natural to us; and so, it is contended, is the reverence for, and the inclination to square our actions by, certain general laws of morality.
Any one who is acquainted with the ethical doctrines either of the Reid and Stewart school, or of the German metaphysicians (not to go further back), knows that such would be the answer of those philosophers to Mr. Bentham; and it is an answer of which Mr. Bentham's writings furnish no sufficient refutation. For it is evident, that these views of the origin of moral distinctions are not what he says all such views are, destitute of any precise and tangible meaning; nor chargeable with setting up as a standard the feelings of the particular person. They set up as a standard what are assumed (on grounds which are considered sufficient) to be the instincts of the species, or principles of our common natural as universal and inexplicable as instincts.
To pass judgment on these doctrines belongs to a profounder and subtler metaphysics than Mr. Bentham possessed. I apprehend it will be the judgment of posterity that in his views of what in the felicitous expression of Hobbes may be called the philosophia prima, it has for the most part, even when he was most completely in the right, been reserved for others to prove him so. The greatest of Mr B's defects, his insufficient knowledge and appreciation of the thoughts of other men, shows itself constantly in his grappling with some delusive shadow of an adversary's opinions, and leaving the actual substance unharmed.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this text?
This text provides an abridged overview of the philosophical opinions of an individual who sought to establish morals and legislation on a scientific foundation. It aims to outline their key ideas and principles.
What are the core principles of the philosopher's philosophy?
The fundamental principles are: happiness (pleasure and freedom from pain) is the ultimate desirable thing; all other things are desirable only as means to achieve happiness; the greatest possible happiness should be the goal of all human thought and action, including morality and government; and pleasure and pain are the driving forces behind human behavior.
How does the philosopher demonstrate the principle of utility?
The philosopher doesn't provide a direct demonstration but instead enumerates and rejects alternative phrases used to define the rule of life, such as "law of nature," "right reason," "natural rights," and "moral sense." He considers these phrases as lacking intelligible meaning beyond a tacit reference to utility.
What is the criticism of the philosopher's treatment of other moral principles?
The criticism is that the philosopher unfairly dismisses other moral principles. It argues that philosophers who advocate for moral sentiments as part of human nature don't necessarily rely on personal opinions but rather on inductive and analytical examination of the human mind.
How do proponents of alternative moral principles respond to the principle of utility?
They argue that moral sentiments (feelings of approval or disapproval) are as fundamental to human nature as the desire for happiness and the fear of suffering. These sentiments follow certain general laws, which may be influenced but not entirely determined by utility.
Does the text offer a definitive judgment on the philosopher's doctrines?
No, the text suggests that a deeper and more nuanced metaphysical analysis is required to fully assess the philosopher's doctrines. It implies that posterity may recognize the validity of some of his ideas, even when the philosopher himself didn't fully substantiate them.
What is identified as a significant weakness of the philosopher?
A key weakness is the philosopher's limited knowledge and understanding of the thoughts of other thinkers. This leads him to engage with simplified or distorted versions of opposing viewpoints, leaving the core arguments of his adversaries unchallenged.
What does the philosopher focus on after establishing the principle of utility?
After establishing the principle of utility, the philosopher dedicates much of his work to outlining practical ethics and legislation. He systematically applies the greatest-happiness principle to these areas, demonstrating consistency and intellectual rigor.
What is said about contradictions in the philosopher's writings?
The text claims the philosopher's writings exhibit remarkably few contradictions or deviations from his established principles, highlighting the consistent and systematic nature of his intellect.
- Quote paper
- John Stuart Mill (Author), 2008, Remarks on Bentham's Philosophy, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/120162
