Bentham and Kant

• The principle of utility states that actions are right if they produce the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people
• Pleasure is the only intrinsic good: everything else is at best instrumentally good
• Benthams approach to happiness was in terms of quantity. Didn't distinguish between the different types of happiness
• Devised the Hedonic Calculus- Everyone must think about general happiness

  7 criteria- intensity, certainty, duration, propinquity, fecundity, purity and extent
• Challenges to Benthams Act Utilitarianism:

  Too much emphasis on consequences that we can't be certain of

  Potential for injustice as minorities could be ignored
• Kants Categorical Imperative:

  Deontological in nature- rules are absolute
• Kant believed everyone has an inbuilt sense of moral duty

  We should do what is right because that is part of what it means to be a rational human being
• Kant believed that the good will is the only thing that is unconditionally, universally and intrinsically good
• Kant stated that a good will is about having the right motive

  His name for this was the Categorical Imperative
• 3 formulations of the Categorical Imperative and serve as criteria for rightness/wrongness of an action:

  1-Universalisability of the principle underlying the action

  2-Never treat people just as means to an end, but always as ends in themselves

  3-Act as if you were making laws for a kingdom that treated people as ends in themselves
• The theory of the Categorical Imperative links to Kant's concept of the summum bonum(highest good)

  -This is where virtue meets perfect happiness

  Humans should strive to be worthy of this
• Belief in the summum bonum and the Categorical Imperative entail 3 beliefs about the world referred to as the 3 postulates- God, immortality and freedom.

  According to Kant, the world is fair so there must be immortality

  Only God can provide this so he exists to guarantee perfect happiness

  Cannot prove that we have free will but it is at the heart of morality
• Strengths of the Categorical Imperative:

  Clear and effective

  Doing a bad act to bring about good is never justifiable

  Second principle promotes equality and justice, which are at the heart of human rights
• Challenges of the Categorical Imperative:

  The argument is based on an assumption

  If consequences are good e.g. saving thousands of lives then surely the act e.g. killing one person is good

  Kants theory is anthropocentric- Devalues animals
• Challenges to Benthams Act Utilitarianism:

  There is too much emphasis on consequences that we cannot be certain of

  Motive, rules and duties are seen as being of no importance

  Potential for injustice as the minorities may be ignored

  Commits the naturalistic fallacy - is does not mean ought
• Responses to the challenges of Benthams Act Utilitarianism:

  In most cases, we can be reasonably sure of the consequences

  Motives are the same as the intended consequence, so they are considered

  It would be unjust to favour minority rights over the majority e.g gang rape

  The universal fact of human experience that all people desire happiness is enough to justify moving from is to ought
• How far Utilitarianism is consistent with moral decision making

  Where they are compatible with Christian views:

  He was concerned with what would result in the greatest good for the greatest number. On some occasions, rules were set aside

  Christian view - Jesus sometimes acted situationally, putting rules aside to help people e.g. healing on the Sabbath

  
  

  Self interest is inevitable as it is an integral part of human nature

  Christian view - Jesus said 'Love thy neighbour as you love yourself'
• Where Benthams views are not compatible with Christianity:

  No time for religion, happiness was an earthly happiness

  Christian view - Belief in God is central, happiness is about eternal joy in Gods presence

  Bentham rejected any special rights - everyones happiness is equal

  Christian view - The Bible teaches to pay special attention to the poor

  Self-interest is inevitable as it is part of human nature

  Christian view - Selflessness is very important
• Where Benthams views are not compatible with Christian views:

  Happiness in the sense of experiencing pleasure and avoiding pain is the sole intrinsic good

  Christian view - Jesus taught that the most important rules are love of God and of your neighbour
• Where Kants views are compatible with Christian decision making:

  The rational basis of Kants ethics links to Aquinas' thinking and sees that the free will is something that is freely and rationally chosen

  Christian view - NML is based on the use of reason. Aquinas emphasised the virtues which a good person freely chooses to practice

  The first formulation of the Categorical Imperative is universalisability

  Christian view - Jesus' Golden Rule is 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you'
• Where Kants views are not compatible with Christian decision making:

  Secular theory in line with 18th century thought. Our sense of moral obligation comes from our nature as rational beings and has nothing to do with God

  Christian view - Belief in God is central to NML and Divine Command Theory

  It is a theory about duty and not love

  Christian view - Jesus' teaching is focused on love of God and others, not duties