Bentham's principle of utility as fundamental morality

Bentham: Principal of utility is the fundamental principle of morality?

Expository section: Briefly explain Bentham's argument for the view that the principle of utility is the fundamental principle of morality. When addressing this question, keep in mind the following related questions: What problems does Bentham think we would face if we were to reject the principle of utility? What does he think is wrong with the alternatives?

According to Jeremy Bentham, the greatest moral principle of humankind is the promotion of happiness. It is impossible to make everyone equally happy all of the time, given the scarcity of finite resources in the world. Thus the most just and the most equitable ideal is to maximize the happiness for the greatest majority of the people possible. The primary motivations of the human animal are pleasure and pain, and maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain is essential, in what has been called the Bentham 'hedonic calculus' (Sweet 2008).

Bentham's morality is consequence-based. He is unconcerned with the morality of actions, only the morality of the ends of actions. He dismisses the idea that there is like 'natural rights' that exist outside of culture and practical legislating and policy-making. The ends justify the means, and if good intentions produce bad ends, there is little benefit in terms of maximizing happiness. Conversely, dubious moral actions (such as dropping a bomb on Hiroshima or Nagasaki) that bring about good ends (like fewer deaths in the long run because of an end to World War II) are acceptable to Bentham. Bentham's principles are also democratic: he values the majority's will over the minority rights of royalty or aristocrats, for example.

Bentham says that moral utilitarianism must be enforced objectively, without subjective self-interest. The interests of the majority, not the decision-maker, must come first for an action to be moral. Rejecting the principles of utility means that the pleasure of a single individual or a minority will outweigh the pleasures of the many, and result in an unjust society. "If pleasure is the good, then it is good irrespective of whose pleasure it is. Thus, a moral injunction to pursue or maximize pleasure has force independently of the specific interests of the person acting. Bentham also suggests that individuals would reasonably seek the general happiness simply because the interests of others are inextricably bound up with their own, though he recognized that this is something that is easy for individuals to ignore" (Sweet 2008).

Critical section: Raise two or three objections to Bentham's principle of utility. What reasons do you think we have to doubt that it is the fundamental principle of morality? It is often helpful to give concrete examples to illustrate your objections.

One obvious argument against Bentham's philosophy is that it is unrealistic to think that a decision-maker can easily determine the best, utilitarian interests of the majority in a disinterested fashion. Bentham's utilitarian decision-maker is presumed to be completely objective, but it is hard to imagine such an individual existing in the real world. Using moral laws, rather than a situational utilitarian calculus might seem to be superior to Bentham's hedonic calculus.