Philosophy of Pleasure: Bentham, Cicero, and Epicurus on Ethics
This paper examines Jeremy Bentham's ethical philosophy as presented in An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation alongside the ancient philosophers Cicero and Epicurus. Using three criteria attributed to Carneades — that a valid ethical theory must allow for choice, be teachable, and appeal to human nature — the paper evaluates how Bentham's utilitarian framework meets these standards. It then compares the three thinkers' views on pain and pleasure as the foundation of moral life, contrasting Bentham's and Cicero's concern for the greatest good of the greatest number with Epicurus's more individualistic pursuit of pleasure.
- Introduction: The Challenge of Ethical Determination: Framing the difficulty of moral judgment across history
- Three Criteria for a Valid Ethical Theory: Carneades' three tests for philosophical validity
- Choice, Teachability, and Human Nature in Bentham: Applying the three criteria to Bentham's framework
- Pain, Pleasure, and the Foundation of Morality: Bentham on pain and pleasure as moral governors
- Cicero and Epicurus on Pleasure and Aversion: Contrasting ancient views on pleasure and pain
- Conclusion: Competing Visions of the Good Life: Collective versus individual pleasure in ethics
✍️ How to write this paper — guide & tools ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It organizes the argument around a clear three-part framework drawn from Carneades, which gives the comparison of Bentham, Cicero, and Epicurus a coherent structure.
- Direct quotations from primary sources are used throughout to let the philosophers speak for themselves before the author interprets their meaning.
- The paper maintains a consistent evaluative lens — how each thinker weighs individual versus collective pleasure — making the contrast between Epicurus and the other two figures sharp and memorable.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative philosophical analysis: it establishes a shared evaluative standard (the three criteria), applies that standard to one thinker in depth, and then uses it as a lens to compare two additional thinkers on a related theme (pain versus pleasure). This move from framework-building to comparative application is a core technique in philosophy essays.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens by framing the difficulty of moral judgment, introduces the three Carneadean criteria, and then works through each criterion using Bentham's text. A second section shifts to the pain-pleasure question and brings in Cicero and Epicurus as comparative voices, resolving in a summary that distinguishes the utilitarian collective view (Bentham and Cicero) from Epicurus's individualism. The two-part structure mirrors the assignment's likely two-prompt design but reads as a unified argument.
Introduction: The Challenge of Ethical Determination
The question of ethics and morality — what is the right thing to do versus the wrong thing in a given situation — can be an extremely difficult one. There are occasions where right and wrong are clear, black-and-white distinctions, and in such scenarios the correct course of action is easily discernible, though it may not be the easiest path to follow. However, this clarity is the rarest of occasions. Far more often, trying to determine the right and wrong choice in a given situation is extremely difficult, if not wholly impossible. Usually the world is not divided into simple terms like good and bad, right or wrong, black or white.
Sometimes in life a person will encounter the opportunity to make a choice, and the right or wrong course will not be as obvious as one would like. There will also be occasions, thankfully, where the correct action is self-evident. Sometimes an honest action will be unprofitable and thus unpleasant, making it difficult for the individual to make the correct choice. However, when faced with something so clear-cut, it is the responsibility of all thinking, ethical beings to do the right thing.
Philosophers since before recorded history have tried to find a way to determine ultimate and empirical morality. In his writings, the philosopher Cicero described three criteria that would determine whether an ethical or philosophical theory had any potential veracity. According to Carneades, the three criteria that indicate a sound philosophical theory are: that it allows for choices, that it can be taught, and that the ethics must "appeal to some original motivating factor already present in human nature" (Carneade 15). Jeremy Bentham was one of the most intelligent minds of the eighteenth century, and in his book An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation he attempted to introduce his own perspectives on these three criteria.
Three Criteria for a Valid Ethical Theory
The criteria articulated by the ancient philosophers hold that a valid ethical theory must satisfy three conditions: it must allow human beings to make their own choices in given situations, it must be teachable to the general population, and it must appeal to the better instincts already present in human nature. Each of these components is necessary in order to create an understanding of how ethics and morals are designed in any given society. Jeremy Bentham, writing centuries after the ancients, was able to articulate how those criteria remain applicable in a modern setting.
Works Cited
Bentham, Jeremy. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, Volume 1. 1789. Print.
Carneade. Cicero de Finibus. 5. Print. 15–17.
Cicero. On Moral Ends. Ed. Julia Annas. Cambridge.
Epicurus. The Epicurus Reader: Selected Writings and Testimonia. Translated by Brad Inwood. Hackett.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.