The good and bad side of Bentham utilitarianism theory
First and foremost, I will give one of the very prominent examples of utilitarian which is the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during the world war two in 1942. Wondering what is utilitarian? Let’s start with the background the background of theory. The fundamental principle of utilitarian is that an action is right if it tends to promote happiness and wrong if it tends to produce the otherwise, not just limited to the performer but afflicted also to everyone affected by it. This theory prompted by English philosopher, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. This theory is an opposition with ethical egoism, which proposes a man should pursue his own interest even at the expense of others. It also differs from other ethical consideration such as Kant, which is consider rightness and wrongness of act depends on motives. It is possible in Utilitarian for the right thing to be done from bad motives as long it gives pleasure.
Why I chose this topic? Because Utilitarianism is a popular subject not only in the philosophy field but also other field like politic and economy. Why did utilitarianism become popular? There are a number of reasons for its appeal. First, it is a relatively simple ethical system to apply. To determine whether an action is moral you merely have to calculate the good and bad consequences that will result from a particular action. If the good compensate the bad, then the action is moral. Second, utilitarianism avoids the need to appeal to divine revelation. Many believers to this ethical system are looking for a way to live a moral life apart from a belief in God. The system replaces revelation with reason. Third, most people already use a form of utilitarianism in their daily decisions. For instance, we make lots of non-moral decisions every
day based upon consequences. At the checkout line, we try to find the shortest line so we can get out the door more quickly. We make most of our financial decisions like writing checks and buying clothes on a utilitarian calculus of cost and benefits. So making moral decisions using utilitarianism seems like a natural extension of our daily decision-making procedures.
The most common critique of Utilitarianism is that happiness cannot be quantified or measured, that there is no way of calculating a happiness or suffering. The same thing applied in concept of “Iman” in Islam. There is no such way to calculating it due to the subjective factors. As a result, Bentham’s theory of hedonic calculus is not practical. Even so, he believed in scientific objectivity and has a good intention in helping others to decide empirically on what us the right or good things to. Also, should be remembered that, different occasion or situation leads to different moral judgments. Based on Bentham theory, we judge an action accordingly to its tendency to produce pleasure or pain, but to evaluate these things; we need to consider 7 things which are intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity and extent. Even though, he does not expect us to go through this process every time face moral decision, but he recommends that we always keep this in mind. In addition, there are also a number of problems with Utilitarianism. One of the problems is leads to an “end justifies the means”. If that were so, then Hitler could justify his action during war world two and the holocaust because the end was to purify the human race while Stalin could justify his slaughter millions of people because he was trying to achieve his mission. These all thing are insane and can’t be accepted by normal people. Also, it indicates that, the end won’t ever justify the means. A particular act cannot be simply judged as good because it may lead to a good consequence. The other critique on this theory is Utilitarianism cannot protect the right of minorities if the goal is the greatest good for the greatest number. In America during 18 century, millions of black people become slave just
because the majority benefited from cheap slave labor. The same situation, when majority of your classmates choose to be selfish and sacrifice the minority safety for their own benefit which is I personally considered as unethical and immoral. I started this essay with the criticism of this theory but like other things in this world, it will come along with the good side. There are few things I agreed upon in this theory. Let’s start with question, what is the goodness aside from making people happy? Why we avoid murder and rape? The answer is because it causes unhappiness. From my perspective, I believe this theory has its own contribution. Since I’m using airlines services for a quite long time, I realize that airlines companies are applying this theory in their business. As we know that first class or business class passengers pay a premium price to get all the luxuries services from the airlines company. Now, compare the price between business class and economy class, you can see huge differences. Let’s ponder, is that the extra price paid by the business class passengers worth with the services they get? If we realize that the premium price charged for business class passengers, who are undoubtedly easily afford it are actually used to ease the deficit of airlines company would have to bear if it is to allow the economy class passengers the opportunity for air travel at a lower price. Another example is income tax system in Malaysia which is believe that most of people rejected and disagree with this idea without realizing the benefit for society as the whole. Taxation system is a progressive system where those who earn more pay more and vice verse. As far as I concern, taxation system help the society in the way that the lower income strata of society also get access to the various public facilities. The other good side of Utilitarianism is it cannot be faulted on its morals as it clearly to seek the happiness and fairness for the largest number of people, which has always been an important consideration in the works of government and other major powers. As mentioned previously, this theory was designed for
global politics unlike Kantian ethics. It reflects that, this theory benefited politic field much as Bentham was a reformer and lawyer. Also, it considers the consequences of all actions, which is the key in building a civilized society. If people were not aware of consequences then there would be no prevention to commit crime. From Islamic perspective, most of principles in this theory are much contradicted with Islamic teaching. We start with the first hadith from 40 hadith by Imam An-Nawawi which is deeds depend upon intentions. Men may deceive by outward piety but Allah who knows the secrets of our hearts cannot be deceived. Good and sincere intentions alone are unprofitable unless followed by actions. As stated early, Utilitarianism does not count the intention of the doer rather than focus on the consequences. In Islam, Muslims are encouraged to have good intention in every aspects of their life because with those intentions they may reward by Allah which is I believe my philosophy lecturer won’t agree due to the instrumental factor. But here where the discussion should be focus more, I can’t say on behalf of Allah the Almighty one but since he bestow me with aql I can figure out something which is the reason Allah want his servants have a good intentions before doing something to prevent something like related to this theory. If a person has a good intention at first then he will try his best to do the action in a good manner and still considering the consequences. Even so, as far as we concern for some reason in an occasion the plan is not turn out just right but we still feel pleasure about it and still do not sacrifice and violate others right and safety just to attain our own pleasure. Moreover, in Islam, Allah has stated in Quran to “enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong”. I believed that everyone has their own interpretation what is wrong what is right and sometimes it depends on the situation. But here where, there are certain fundamental principles in this world that we all agreed upon that are wrong. For example, kill others and rape. We all considering that action
as immoral and cruel even for any reason. Yes, I do agree that at some situation killing is permissible due to the defend factor. But how about rape? I’m not gender bias, rape here can be man or woman. Even so I believe that across the countries people are focusing on woman only. Then we will use woman as an example. For instance, Utilitarianism would justify use of the date-rape drug, as the rapist gains sexual pleasure, and the victim isn't even awake to experience it. There's a net gain of happiness, but clearly this is wrong. What interesting is that this example can become paradoxically worse? Imagine if instead of 1 person carrying out the date rape, it’s a 5 man gang. In this case the net happiness produces is multiplied by five, but instinct tells us that this scenario is even worse. Don’t we should minimize others pain also? I think we should consider the consequences in this theory, then how about if the girl gets pregnant? How about her pride and emotion? We refer back to the previous verse in Quran states above, it shows that the instrument of the state is the form of the actual establishments of conditions and requirements which preserve and promote human good. Now, the good being a comprehensive term, it includes all goods aspects such as moral, intellectual, p olitical and economic. As human it becomes our fitrah for seeking the pleasure and to attain the happiness in this world. I am also a part of it and at certain moment it becomes my goal in this life. However, violate others right and justice to attain my pleasure is something can’t be accepted. Sometimes I do believe, people who done something bad using this theory to justify their own wrong. People might think I am selfish and take advantage to others because when it comes to benefit my own self such as got low price for airlines ticket and having opportunity to use public facilities then I supported this theory then when it comes to the bad side I totally rejected Utilitarianism. I want to make it clear here, it has nothing to do with being selfish and injustice to this theory. My argument here, this theory bring much benefit to society as the whole but regard the right of
person as individual which is I don’t disagree. For instance, Utilitarianism would kill one innocent person in order to save 5 serial killers. So long as the murderers wouldn't kill again, Utility would accept this. I think everyone should have their right and none of us given the right to being injustice or violate others freedom or right. As conclusion, I am not rejecting the whole theory because it still gives benefits for others. But what I don’t agree here is when people use this for their justification and much worse do something which a re immoral and unethical.
INTRODUCTION TO MORAL PHILOSOPHY (EDC 2354) INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT: ESSAY TOPIC: THE CRITICISM ON BENTHAM UTILITARIANISM THEORY.
PREPARED FOR
DR AFAREEZ ABDUL RAZAK AL HAFIZ PREPARED BY
MASRIJAH MASIR 1110902
SEMESTER 1 2013/2014
