Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism, as an ethical theory, evaluates the morality of individual actions and social policies based on their outcomes. Its fundamental principle is to maximize the happiness of individuals and society. Utilitarianism determines the ethical value of actions by favoring options that produce the greatest benefit. This benefit is typically calculated using pleasure and pain as criteria, with the highest benefit aimed at reaching the broadest segment of society. According to utilitarianism, the morally right action is generally the action that transcends individual interests to maximize social welfare.

Historical Background

The origins of utilitarianism extend to the late 18th century. The foundations of the theory were laid by the English philosopher Jeremy Bentham. Bentham developed a hedonistic approach that used pleasure and pain as the criteria for evaluating individual and social actions. According to Bentham, the most important factor in achieving social order is maximizing benefit (happiness) and minimizing pain.

John Stuart Mill is another major thinker who made significant contributions to the development of utilitarianism. Mill expanded Bentham’s views by extending the utilitarian perspective to issues of individual rights and social justice. One of Mill’s most important contributions to utilitarianism was the idea that happiness must be evaluated not only quantitatively but also qualitatively. Mill argued that some pleasures are inherently more valuable and superior than others, asserting that utilitarianism requires a qualitative rather than merely quantitative assessment. These two thinkers established both the theoretical foundation of utilitarianism and its philosophical and ethical framework.

Core Principles

The Principle of Utility

The principle of utility, which forms the core of utilitarianism, is the primary main for determining the ethical value of actions. According to this principle, the morality of an action is not determined solely by the action itself but also by its consequences for society. In this context, the right action is the one that maximizes the general welfare of society. Utilitarianism’s approach implies that actions and policies must aim to produce the greatest overall happiness. Thus, decisions and policies that most effectively enhance social welfare are considered morally correct. The principle of utility can be applied to both individual decisions and social policies, always favoring options that yield the greatest benefit. This opinion considers not only individuals’ immediate interests but also the long-term welfare of the entire society.

While the principle of utility seeks to maximize overall societal happiness, it also advocates that each individual’s interests and desires should align with the common good. Therefore, utilitarianism often serves as a guide for balancing individual freedoms and social responsibilities. However, this balance is not always easily achieved, and individual rights and freedoms may sometimes be overlooked in the pursuit of maximizing social benefit.

The Hedonistic View

Another key principle of utilitarianism is the hedonistic view. This perspective uses pleasure and pain as the fundamental human experiences for defining happiness. Hedonism asserts that human nature seeks to maximize pleasure and minimize pain. According to this view, the ethical value of any action is determined by the balance of pleasure and pain it produces at either the individual or societal level. Within this framework, happiness encompasses not only physical satisfaction but also emotional and mental pleasures.

Hedonistic utilitarianism assumes that pleasure and pain are directly comparable. Therefore, the benefit of an action or policy is measured not only by its pleasurable effects but also by its painful ones. Actions are evaluated based on the total sum of these effects. This aspect of utilitarianism requires social decision-makers to calculate the impacts of social arrangements in order to achieve the greatest happiness. However, measuring pleasure and pain accurately and objectively is a difficult process, as each individual’s perception of pleasure and pain may differ.

This view proposes evaluating all actions and social arrangements based on the aggregate of individual pleasures and pains. Thus, the best way for a society or individual to achieve happiness is through social decisions designed to maximize overall welfare. One criticized aspect of the hedonistic perspective is that reducing pleasure and pain to purely quantitative measures may overlook deeper, multi-layered forms of happiness at both individual and societal levels.

Individual and Social Utility

Utilitarianism offers an approach aimed at balancing individual and social utility. Individual utility can be defined as the effort to balance pleasure and pain in each person’s life. This includes physical, emotional, and psychological satisfaction. Social utility, on the other hand, concerns the overall well-being, peace, and general happiness of society. Utilitarianism argues that individual interests must be aligned with social utility. This plays a crucial role in formulating social policies, as every action or decision at the societal level directly affects individual welfare.

Balancing individual and social utility is one of the most challenging aspects of utilitarianism. Achieving this balance may sometimes require restricting individual rights and freedoms. For example, mandatory vaccinations required by a society for public health, while limiting individual freedom, may be justified to enhance social benefit. Utilitarianism provides a guide in such cases for determining whether individual rights should yield to social benefit.

Finding the balance between individual interests and social benefit is a central ethical question in shaping policies and personal decisions. Decisions that benefit the broader society may sometimes require sacrificing individuals’ short-term interests. However, utilitarianism considers such sacrifices acceptable if they lead to greater happiness at the societal level. In this context, the fundamental goal of utilitarianism is to determine how individual interests can be balanced to maximize overall social benefit and enhance collective well-being.

Key Figures and Thinkers in Utilitarianism

Jeremy Bentham

Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) is the founder of utilitarianism and the architect of its foundational principles. Bentham argued that when evaluating individual and societal actions, the outcomes and the happiness they produce are the most important criteria. Bentham’s utilitarianism is based on the principle known as the “greatest happiness principle,” meaning the morality of an action is measured by the total amount of happiness it generates. This approach treats pleasure and pain as the primary measures guiding human decisions. Bentham proposed that laws and regulations should be shaped according to these principles and developed a “hedonic calculus” to identify actions that maximize benefit. Bentham maintained that social change should be pursued with the aim of maximizing happiness and minimizing pain. By developing the core theory of utilitarianism, Bentham transformed it into an ethical system that later evolved into diverse interpretations and understandings.

John Stuart Mill

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873) is a major philosopher who further developed and deepened Bentham’s understanding of utilitarianism. While defending utilitarianism, Mill argued that not only quantitative pleasures but also qualitative pleasures must be considered. With this view, Mill helped embed utilitarianism within a broader ethical framework. Mill’s definition of happiness focuses on the quality and depth of pleasures. For instance, he asserted that intellectual pleasures are superior to physical ones, thereby preventing utilitarianism from being reduced to a purely quantitative assessment and introducing a more meaningful and profound conception of happiness. Moreover, Mill maintained that individual rights are important and that social benefit must be balanced with individual freedoms. His works on “freedom” on helped frame utilitarianism in a more humane context. Mill’s contributions ensured that utilitarianism considers not only social benefit but also individual rights and freedoms.

Other Important Thinkers

Henry Sidgwick

Henry Sidgwick, a major defender of utilitarianism toward the end of the 19th century, is known for his efforts to resolve complex ethical problems within utilitarianism. Sidgwick systematized utilitarian thought and sought to balance individual and social utility. He conducted a detailed analysis of how utilitarian calculations should be performed at both ideal and practical levels, further refining the utilitarian ethical framework. Sidgwick’s approach enhanced the applicability of utilitarianism by taking into account the ethical challenges involved in measuring happiness at both individual and societal levels.

Peter Singer

Peter Singer, one of the leading philosophers of the 20th century, is particularly known for his work on animal rights. Singer made significant contributions to transforming utilitarianism into a broader ethical framework. His principle of “equal consideration of interests” argues that utilitarianism should apply not only to humans but to all sentient beings (animals included). Singer expanded utilitarianism in the context of animal rights and environment ethics by asserting that animals also have a right to happiness. Furthermore, Singer’s concept of “long-term utility” broadened utilitarianism into a more universal framework by considering not only immediate happiness but also the welfare of future generations. His ideas provide important guidance on how utilitarianism can be applied in the modern era.

Main Types of Utilitarianism

Act Utilitarianism

Act utilitarianism is an approach that seeks to maximize utility by focusing on the consequences of individual actions. This form of utilitarianism argues that each action must be evaluated separately. That is, each action is measured by the utility or damage it produces. Act utilitarianism holds that in every situation, the action to be taken must produce the greatest possible happiness. In this context, decisions by individuals or societies are assessed solely based on the immediate consequences of the action at hand. For example, if an urgent situation word arises in a society, the most appropriate action under current conditions is the one that maximizes social benefit. Act utilitarianism advocates evaluating every action equally and generating a solution tailored to the immediate needs of the situation. However, this approach may sometimes overlook long-term effects because it assesses only the outcomes of current actions. Despite this, act utilitarianism can be an effective approach for making fast and practical decisions.

Rule Utilitarianism

Rule utilitarianism, unlike act utilitarianism, aims to maximize utility based on general societal rules rather than individual actions. This approach advocates adopting specific rules and following them to maximize overall social welfare. Rule utilitarianism recommends that every individual or social actor follow the same rules in every situation. These rules are designed to best reflect the general interest of society and produce the greatest benefit.

In rule utilitarianism, the morality of an action is determined not merely by its immediate consequences but by the long-term effects of the general rule that guides the action. For example, a rule granting equal rights to all individuals in a society may be adopted; this rule is accepted as the most effective way to ensure the greatest happiness in all circumstances. Rule utilitarianism focuses on the sustainability and stability of social order rather than on individual actions. This approach can provide a more strong foundation for justice and order in society because adherence to established rules enhances long-term social trust.

Totalist and Average Utility Approaches

Another significant distinction within utilitarianism concerns how it balances total utility against average utility. There is a fundamental difference between these two approaches.

Totalist Approach

Totalist utilitarianism advocates maximizing total utility. This approach considers the total amount of utility generated within a society or by a specific action. Individual utilities are aggregated to increase the overall utility of society. The total utility approach evaluates each individual’s benefit collectively to make decisions aimed at maximizing overall happiness. This typically implies that everyone’s level of utility should be increased proportionally. Totalist utilitarianism aims to achieve greater long-term social benefit. However, this approach may sometimes lead to the neglect of minority interests because its focus is primarily on maximizing the total utility of the entire society.

Average Utility Approach

The average utility approach, by contrast, focuses on maximizing the average utility per individual in society. In this approach, the average level of individual happiness is taken into account, and efforts are made to raise the society’s average utility to the highest possible level. Unlike total utility, the goal here is to increase each individual’s utility equally. The average utility approach aims for a more just distribution and takes individual inequalities into account. However, this approach may also sometimes limit certain individual interests in order to achieve greater overall benefits at the societal level.