Reaction to J. Bentham’s “An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation”
Andrea – 9/7/7 – 19:140


This article was, on the whole, a very enjoyable and interesting read. I have never before had the chance to read a theory of Utilitarianism by anyone other than John S. Mill, and I learned a lot hearing the same theory from a different voice. It seems that Bentham had many critics, or at least anticipated as much. Every point is defended in intricate detail – he even devotes a section to a process by which to convert those who disagree with Utilitarianism.
On the whole, I tended to agree with Bentham’s theories. I also believe that it is human nature to avoid pain and seek pleasure. However, some of his ideas were unclear or seemed counterintuitive and in my opinion need to be explained more thoroughly, or else reconsidered. For example, Bentham’s section on measuring pleasure and pain. He spends much time discussing the qualitative aspects of ways in which one could measure each sensation (intensity, duration, et cetera) and makes a logical argument for each. My confusion came when he began to attempt to quantify the “goodness” and “badness” of a tendency. How exactly is one to assign and sum the value of every feeling or action? How is one to determine whether, for example, a stubbed toe is a three on the badness scale or a two? Which is worse, stubbing ones toe or jamming ones finger? And does the satisfaction of building a birdhouse outweigh two splinters and a smashed thumb?
I would have liked to hear Bentham’s application of Utilitarianism to everyday life (especially how he related it to his own). Perhaps the reading was too short to cover all counter situations that might arise, but one example would have gone a long way toward convincing me to subscribe to Utilitarianism.