Utilitarianism as the Text Points

Utilitarianism

As the text points out, it is unlikely that Jeremy Bentham himself ever intended for the hedonistic calculus to be used as a concrete guide for legal or public policy: "It is not to be expected that this process should be strictly pursued previously to every moral judgment, or to every legislative or judicial operation," (p. 277). However, Bentham was concerned about the need for a quantifiable ethic. Because ethical judgments had for so long been made by an elite group of people with no concern for the utility of a harmonious society, it was important to set out a seemingly scientific method of making moral decisions. Instead of the Church or noblemen determining right from wrong behaviors based on what they believe morality to be, morality now rests in the hands of logic and reason. Empiricism and science hold out hope that human ethics can be quantified and therefore calculated in ways that promote democracy and equality.

Unfortunately, Bentham's hedonistic calculus cannot be employed on a practical level. Lawmakers could not possibly incorporate Bentham's seven concepts into their legislation, and organizations also could not rest on the seven issues as bases for their ethical codes. A "hedon" is not quantifiable, even if it is a fun and attractive philosophical concept.

Bentham's hedonistic calculus is consistent; the equation does offer a high degree of internal validity. For example, Bentham is an overt consequentialist. It is far easier to measure the consequences of actions than the motive that precedes them. Some human motives can never be known, especially those that are suppressed or unconscious. Consequences can be observed, recorded, and discussed. In this sense, the hedonistic calculus is more useful than any vague or problematic deontological ethic. Deontological ethics pose problems in areas such as abortion, in which individuals cannot agree between what is morally right or wrong.

Bentham is looking for measurable outcomes, because he wants to quantify ethics instead of leaving it up for endless debate. Good intentions can lead to undesirable consequences, which is why it is important to think through actions and consider all possible outcomes. If the outcome harms others, then the action was morally wrong. It makes more sense to critique actions than motives. According to Bentham, "there is no such thing as a motive which is a bad one in itself," (cited on p 279). Motives cannot be measured as well as consequences can. Giving a gift to someone is usually a good thing, even if the gift-giver gives grudgingly. Likewise, a donation to charity has positive outcomes, even if the person is motivated by guilt. The hedonistic calculus can also explain why crises often lead to opportunities for growth and positive change. A divorce, which could be measured as morally wrong, can have positive outcomes for both parties as well as any children involved.