Introduction
Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill were brilliant philosophers whose ideas continue to have an impact, particularly on the nature of happiness. Their thinking was similarly based on utilitarian philosophy, and they stated that an activity was correct if it resulted in the greatest happiness in society. Indeed, Bentham and Mill's intellectual opinions on the legitimacy of utilitarian concepts have continued to affect the world and are important in defending individual rights. This paper will analyze and contrast Bentham and Mill's views on the nature of happiness.
Bentham's Views on the Nature of Happiness
Bentham rendered utility principle to be “greatest happiness of the greatest number” (Bentham 2) According to him, an action is right if it gives happiness to many people. In his belief, this was important in enhancing the happiness of the minority groups. Bentham stipulated that “the less the numerical difference between the minority and majority, the more obvious the deficiency in aggregate happiness will be” (Bentham 7). Therefore, in approximating the happiness of all the members of the society, it has to translate to a greater aggregate of happiness. In his argument on the nature of happiness, he also explained the universal interests. Universal of interest relates to the interests which are shared by all people. He claimed that this was a concept of the “greatest happiness principle” aimed at the “maximum of comfort and security” of all people (Bentham 17). Government legislative decision should aim at universal reach, and the framework of individual right particularly security is paramount to bring happiness. Bentham employed utilitarian rule and noted that experiences of pain reduce the minimum necessary benefits of people.
Mill's Views on the Nature of Happiness
Furthermore, in a utilitarian calculation which he used in explaining happiness, pleasures are added and then pains removed from the summation in attempts to determine the rationality that would give a justification to the best policy which will bring happiness. Bentham ascertained that the optimal utility is achieved when there is equal distribution of the basic needs which bring happiness. The maximum utility requires that existing practices have to attest and enhance the greatest happiness. Bentham mentioned that when a jury detects deficiencies, new precepts and rules have to be developed to foster the utility principle. “The greatest happiness principle sets the over-arching objective and is the critical standard against which existing practices are to be judged” (Bentham 16).
Comparison and Contrast
Similar to Bentham, Mill’s argument on the nature of happiness alludes that happiness has to benefit many people. Mill in his argument claimed that an individual's happiness is a good to the person. He alluded that the happiness refers to a good aggregate of all people. This forms the foundation of moral utility or simply put, the greatest happiness principle. This principle states that actions are right if they encourage happiness and this is equally true according to Bentham. Greatest happiness denotes pleasure and thus the absence of pain. Wrong actions lead to unhappiness. Mill claimed that the principle of utility elucidates that happiness is the ultimate criterion in establishing what is moral (Robson). According to Mill, an ideal moral society is the one where everyone is happy and thus free from pain. The purpose of morality in life is to “increase the number of good things (such as pleasure and happiness) in the world and decrease the number of bad things (such as pain and unhappiness)” (Mill 10). The act of utilitarian suggests that, in deciding what to do, one has to perform the action that creates the greatest net utility and thus produce the best overall results and well-being. For this reason, the greatest amount of happiness translates to the sum of happiness of every person. Thus, the more every individual is happy and free, the larger the amount of the total happiness that is attainable in society. Utilitarianism is thus a moral theory that is based on pleasure to create happiness. Mill went further to mention that accomplishing goals along with living a virtuous life are part of happiness.
Conclusion
A fundamental difference that is evident is that while Mill claims that happiness is the sole basis of morality, Bentham emphasized that happiness should aim at making the minority groups happy. Bentham also used the Utilitarian calculator in finding the greatest happiness and Mill did not. Instead, Mill focused on explaining that pleasure and pain were the gist of happiness and unhappiness. However, both explained the need for justice to attain happiness. Mill supported his argument by explaining that sentiment of justice is based on utility and thus rights are essential for bringing human happiness. Besides, Mill and Bentham said that protection of human rights was paramount. Again, according to the two, a moral action has to bring happiness to the greatest number of people. However, Bentham used the concept of universal utility in explaining happiness, and this was not the case with Mill. The two also showed that there is a connection between happiness and justice.
Mill and Bentham depict to have similar thoughts on the nature of utilitarian. They both used utilitarian in explaining the nature of happiness. It has to aggregate on all people. The principle of greatest happiness is underlining to both philosophers. Despite the similarities, key contrast are evident in the concept of minority, universal utility and legislation. Even though there are differences, the postulation of the two philosophers continues to impact many spheres of life.
Works Cited
Bentham, Jeremy. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1996.
Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism. Peterborough, Ont., Broadview Press, 2011.
Robson John M. John Stuart Mill, the Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume X - Essays on Ethics, Religion, and Society (Utilitarianism) [1833]. Online Library of Liberty. http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/mill-the-collected-works-of-john-stuart-mill-volume-x-essays-on-ethics-religion-and-society. Accessed 23 December, 2017.
