Hello stwalsh2~
The Dictionary of Philosophical Terms and Names defines the “greatest
happiness principle” as “the definition of moral value by
utilitarians. As stated by Hutcheson, Bentham, and Mill, the principle
is that actions are right only insofar as they tend to produce the
greatest balance of pleasure over pain for the largest number of
people.” (http://www.swif.uniba.it/lei/foldop/foldoc.cgi?greatest+happiness+principle
)
Jeremy Bentham proposed this principle in the 18th century. He
believed that the goodness of an action shouldn’t be judged by its
“good intentions,” but by its consequences. He equated “utility” with
human happiness, and believed people should aim for the “greatest
happiness for the greatest number.” Bentham defined happiness as “the
sum of pleasures and pains.” This philosophy is known as
Utilitarianism (because it emphasizes the utility of behavioral
consequences).
“When applied at the level of individual choice, this theory runs into
some difficulties,” says Ruut Veenhoven in his “Positive Psychology in
Practice” article (“The Greatest Happiness Principle,” found for a
limited time in this Google cache:
://www.google.com/search?q=cache:TNMyzRQiR_IJ:www.eur.nl/fsw/research/veenhoven/Pub2000s/2003c-txt.rtf+%22Greatest+Happiness+Principle%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
)”One problem is that often one cannot foresee what the balance of
effects on happiness will be. Another problem is that the theory deems
well-intended behavior to be a-moral if it happens to pan out
adversely...Imagine the case of a loving mother who saves the life of
her sick child, a child that grows up to be a criminal; mothers can
seldom foresee a child's future and can hardly be reproached for their
unconditional motherly love.”
Veenhoven goes on to write, “The theory is better suited for judging
general rules, such as the rule that mothers should care for their
sick children. It is fairly evident that adherence to this rule will
add to the happiness of a great number…This variant is known as
‘Rule-Utilitarianism.’ Rule-Utilitarianism has been seen as a moral
guide for legislation and has played a role in discussions about
property laws and the death penalty…The greatest happiness principle
can also be used when taking decisions regarding health care and
therapy. Treatment strategies can be selected on the basis of their
effects on the happiness of the greatest number of patients.”
The ultimate goal of the greatest happiness principle is a “life as
free of pain and as full of enjoyment as possible, both in terms of
quantity and quality.” (“Restatement of the Greatest Happiness
Principle,” http://sally.fowler.faculty.noctrl.edu/INTRO/ppt/MILL2/sld011.htm
) However, an individual’s happiness is not the only thing that
matters. Everybody’s happiness counts. In 1863, John Stuart Mill’s
“Utilitarianism” (which elaborated on Bentham’s philosophy) stated
actions are right as long as they promote happiness; they are wrong if
they promote unhappiness.
For more information on Jeremy Bentham and his greatest happiness
principle, check out “Bentham and the Early Utilitarians,” The
Cambridge History of English and American Literature, Bartley:
http://www.bartleby.com/221/0305.html )
and “Jeremy Bentham,” by Ross Harrison, The Oxford Companion to
Philosophy: http://www.benthamlinks.com/oxford.htm
For a little bit about Bentham’s views and a bibliography of his work,
see “Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832),” in The Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy: http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/b/bentham.htm
For more on John Stuart Mill and Utilitarianism, see “John Stuart
Mill,” Great Philosophers, Oregon State University:
http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/Philosophers/Mill/mill.html
)
Keywords Used:
"Greatest Happiness Principle"
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22Greatest+Happiness+Principle%22&btnG=Google+Search
"Jeremy Bentham"
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22Jeremy+Bentham%22&btnG=Google+Search |
,
0 Comments
)