Utilitarianism is considered by many to be one of the most
persuasive and influential theories ever presented in philosophical circles. Even
though it wasn't completely expressed in its modern sense until the 19th
century, unlabeled utilitarianism has been seen all throughout history. Because
of this, there's no real set, uniform type of utilitarianism, but most people
who claim to be utilitarianist hold the view that the morally right action is
the action that produces the most good. Some would claim this is merely a
subset of consequentialism, since in essence, what is considered the right
action is based entirely on the consequences produced. Others claim it's a
branch of egoism, but utilitarianism has a grander scope of the consequences
considered: utilitarianists seek to maximize the overall good, considering the
good of others as well as one's own good. Both Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart
Mill, the classical utilitarianists, agreed with Epicurus' hedonistic view of
value, that the worth of something is measured by how much good is brought
about for the greatest number. (Burns, 2005) This works for the utilitarianist,
because the theory is impartial and gender-neutral, meaning that everyone's
happiness is equal, whether you're a homeless man, a single mom, a sports star
or the president.
The origins of utilitarianism are a bit disputed, even
though Jeremy Bentham was the first to really pin down and develop actual
"utilitarianism", because the concept of the greatest good for the
greatest number had been around for ages before. The distinctive part about
Bentham's utilitarianism is the premise that morally proper actions and
behaviors will not bring harm to others, but rather increase the happiness and
utility of the people involved. It is interesting to note that many of the
earliest utilitarians were in fact theologians. Richard Cumberland, John Gay
and others believed that it was our duty to promote human happiness, since it
was God's will that we be happy. Gay specifically held that wants what's best
for us, He wants us to be happy, and since God gave us a measure of virtue, the
happiness of mankind is that measure, but "once removed." (Driver,
2009) Combined with the view of human motivation and even some egotistic
elements, Gay concluded that a person's salvation and eternal happiness
depended solely on compliance with the will of God, as did virtue itself. So as
one promoted the happiness of mankind, it overlapped with the happiness of
one's self, and it wasn't merely an accident, but divine providence. This view,
while acceptable at the time, isn't a very clean theory, because it isn't clear
or scientifically measurable what work God does, at least in regards of
normative ethics.
Gay's theory, however, has considerable influence on later
utilitarianistic writers. William Paley took Gay's theories on utilitarianism
and continued to develop them, but men like David Hume rejected the theological
views in favor more naturalistic approach, relying primarily on human nature's
sympathetic interaction with others. Hume's absence of God as a theoretical
necessity undermined both Paley's and Gay's work, but all three were considered
to be highly influential to utilitarianism in general. There were other notable
utilitarians during that time period, specifically Anthony Ashley Cooper, 3rd
Earl of Shaftesbury and Francis Hutcheson, and these men, along with the aforementioned
three, make what some call the "British Moralists", and were all key
influences on classic utilitarianism. (Driver, 2009)
Utilitarianism in and of itself is an interesting theory.
It's views on the collective good are loved and hated at the same time, being
both wonderful and horrid. Jeremy Bentham thought that if man could be taught
to care for the collective, everyone would be better off. If humans could
unconditionally love one another without reserve, and put the good of the group
before their own – while it still included their own good, for the most part –
then a utopian society would result, because the happiness of the community as
a whole is nothing other than the addition of all the individual humans'
interests. (Kemerling, 2011)
This very premise posed a problem, though. It didn't
factor for the inevitable evil that is so pervasive in human beings, known
amongst Christian circles as the "sin nature". In fact, Dr. Leonard
Peikoff states in his book The Ominous
Parallels,
"Utilitarianism
is a union of hedonism and Christianity. The first teaches man to love
pleasure; the second, to love his neighbor. The union consists in teaching man
to love his neighbor’s pleasure. To be exact, the Utilitarians teach that an
action is moral if its result is to maximize pleasure among men in
general."
So according to utilitarianists, man should serve, but not
serve a specific nation or even economic class, but merely for the so-called
"greatest good," regardless of who it may or may not harm. Dr.
Peikoff goes on to point out that Mill, one of the aforementioned fathers of
the utilitarian theory, says that men must be "disinterested" and
"strictly impartial" about their own happiness and well-being, in
spite of what is natural inclinations may be. (Peikoff, 1983) Because of this
blind following for the collective, the theory can easily be hijacked for the
malevolent use of a select few, using propaganda and philosophy. This can be
seen in the writings of Karl Marx; Lenin's October Revolution, where workers
banded together claiming the good of many at the expense of the few; the Nazi
regime of Hitler, with Dr. Josef Goebbels telling his countrymen that they
needed to put the good of the Fatherland before their own, regardless of
consequence; and then perfected again in Russia, under the leadership of Josef
Stalin, and ultimately leading to the deaths of millions of Soviet citizens. In
a disturbing twist, Dr. Peikoff also finds these very principles being taught
with prevalence in the American school system, from colleges, all the way to
grade school.
It's hard to say if Bentham, Mill, Hume, and the other
fathers of Utilitarianism would be proud of what their theory had accomplished,
if they would overlook the atrocities it is linked to of the 20th
century, if they would have any regrets, or attempt to alter their theory. But
for a theory designed to bring the greatest pleasure to the greatest number of
people, it has brought a great deal of pain into the world. A theory much like
Communism, socialism or fascism, utilitarianism is a wonderful idea – on paper.
But unfortunately, when applied in a practical sense, is nothing more than
that: a tried, and failed, idea.
References
Burns, J. H. (2005). Happiness and Utility:Jeremy Bentham’s Equation.
Retrieved from http://www.utilitarianism.com/jeremy-bentham/greatest-happiness.pdf
Driver, J. (2009). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University.
Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/utilitarianism-history/
Kemerling, G. K. (2011, November 12). www.philosophypages.com.
Retrieved from http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/5q.htm
Peikoff, L. (1983). The Ominous Parallels: the End of Freedom in America. New York City: Plume.
No comments:
Post a Comment