Jeremy Bentham: The Jurist and Elder Statesman of English Philosophy - Essay Example

Jeremy Bentham: The Jurist and Elder Statesman of English Philosophy Jeremy Bentham, the jurist and elder statesman of English philosophy, lives on in his legacy of great ethical and political theorizing. Developing in an age of increasing conservatism and fearfulness of the future, Bentham grew to hold contempt for the past and hope for the future. As such, he is a legendary social reformer and political theorist. His approach to political philosophy, which we know affectionately as “legal positivism”, represents a radical leap forward in denying the connection between laws and nature. “Natural rights”, says Bentham, are “nonsense upon stilts”. Bentham complemented his political theory with a broad ethical basis, which eventually became utilitarianism, the theory that ethical action is right inasmuch as it maximizes the pleasure of all. Although Bentham was notable in his own right, perhaps his greatest contribution to philosophy was his influence upon John Stewart Mill, the famous ethicist who would go on to develop and formalize the utilitarian ethical philosophy, launching it into the world’s attention and thereby facilitating its application to common thought and law. Bentham, as a philosopher, favored economic freedoms, freedoms of speech, for women, for slaves, and the elimination of common forms of physical punishment, including but not limited to the death penalty. He espoused the right to free trade, divorce, homosexuality, usury, and later became famous for his position on the rights of animals, which would come to influence philosopher Peter Singer’s writings on the matter (Gruen, 2003). Contributing in large part also to the fields of economics and criminal justice, Bentham made a lasting influence on Western civilization as a whole. In sum, Bentham left a lasting imprint on how we think about our societies and ourselves; this impression tends toward personal freedom from undue suffering at the hands of others. Jeremy Bentham, as a man, had his beginnings in London on February 15, 1748. Born to attorneys, the young Bentham grew up around Enlightenment rationalism and in the context of economic, social, and political upheaval. During this age of revolution, Bentham became enthralled with existing institutions. As such, he focused his attention not on practicing law, as his father and grandfather did, but on reforming it. Early on, Bentham employed a very polemical approach to his social reformist ideals, and largely concerned himself with very theoretical legal matters. From this work on law, there is not much in his writings besides Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, which is an extension of an early form of “the greatest happiness principle” to politics. Bentham became involved with politics itself in 1781 when he became close to Earl of Shelburne, making his way into the ranks of Whig lawyers and politicians, following the publication of his first major work, A Fragment on Government. To these lawyers and politicians, Bentham’s work left little effect. Thus, in 1785, he left for Russia to join his brother Samuel Bentham. While in Russia, Bentham magnified the intensity his work and developed the idea of the Panopticon. The Panopticon is a prison in which unseen and unknown guards observe all prisoners. The architect of the prison has complete control, both of the prisoners’ minds and body. Consequently, the Panopticon, according to Bentham, was to be “a new mode of obtaining power of mind over mind, in a quality hitherto without example” (Bentham, Panopticon, 1995, p. 29). Bentham would pursue implementation of his Panopticon design; he hoped that the concept would interest Russian leaders. After years of Bentham’s personal financial difficulties, England’s Parliament sanctioned the development of a Panopticon prison, which the King later cancelled in 1811. After the loss, the government granted him compensation for the project. Prior to this, in 1796, an inheritance gave him financial security, allowing him to pursue theoretical matters even further. Around this time, Bentham’s writings came to have great influence, particularly on the European continent. Bentham, attracting an audience of followers (later called “Benthamites”), was “thought to be more European in his views than English”, which lends credit to the view that Bentham was a political radical (Landry, 2006). The extent to which Bentham brought enduring change to British politics is still up for question. Taken together, his biography offers an interesting complement to the details of his political and ethical philosophies spread through time. Bentham’s philosophy can best be summed up as “progressive”, which, taken in the context of the conservative political context of mid-18th century Britain, can be considered “radical” (Mill, 2003, p. 53). Laws, according to Bentham, ought to be useful and that we ought not to keep them merely for the sake of their past success. For Bentham, all of ethics reduces to the so-called “sacred truth” of the “greatest happiness principle”. He declared famously “the greatest happiness of the greatest number is the foundation of morals and legislation” (Hart, 1982, p. 40). In many ways, this summarizes the sum of his moral and political philosophies, demonstrating quite succinctly that both he cut from the same stone. Put quite simply, the utilitarian ethic Bentham focused his philosophy upon “enlightened self-interest”, which stands for acting on behalf of others as a means of bringing about one’s own happiness. According to Ralph Blumenau, “Bentham thought that, in the long run, one could achieve maximum happiness for oneself only if one lived in a society which is itself as happy as possible. It was, therefore, a matter of one’s enlightened self-interest that he seeks life in a happy society…” (Blumenau, 2002, p. 420). Such principles, those like (a) the greatest happiness principle, (b) a universal egoism, and (c) the identification of interests with those of others, all ground Bentham’s contribution to ethical philosophy. Bentham first put the term “utility” in the ethical context of maximization. In this, he made happiness or pleasure the standard of value: an act is right with respect to the manner in which it maximizes or minimizes total utility of all parties. The principle of utility (which is equivalent to the greatest happiness principle) applies equally and always, advocating for or condemning entire arrays of human action as ethical or unethical respectively. This ethical view stems from the belief that the pleasure/pain mechanism is the primary motivator of all action; but this perhaps unfalsifiable scientific view still does not justify any position in ethics. Bentham’s belief in utilitarianism was justified by the supposed advantages of the clarity and unmistakable nature of a principle of utility. It also follows the notion of equality; “hedonic calculus”, the quantitative system used in comparing preferences, emphasizes when calculating equally the happiness of all involved parties. Bentham also found support from the thought that individual interests share intimate connections with those of other individuals in a group setting. Therefore, acting in service to the happiness of one’s neighbors means acting in service to one’s own happiness indirectly. This is the identification of interests with those of others, (c), and represents a key tenet of Bentham’s philosophy, insofar as it holds the entire edifice together. Bentham described ethics as “the art of directing men's action to the production of the greatest possible quantity of happiness, on the part of those whose interest is in view” (Bentham, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, 2005, p. 310). Consequently, Bentham found no contradiction between his emphasis upon the greatest happiness for the greatest number and the egoism he so clearly accepted. Bentham’s political philosophy, firmly rooted in his ethics, was equally well developed. He stood atop a group of intellectuals called by some “the philosophic radicals”. This group, which often touted Bentham as a champion, held no common theory. However, it can be said that they generally agreed on the problems facing 18th- and 19th-century English society. These problems, reduced to opposition to conservative stances with respect to its legal and economic systems, were the target of Bentham’s arguments. These arguments favored the restructuring of the legal system, in favor of individual freedoms of contract. At that time, this meant increased suffrage, autonomy, and increased representation for all citizens by their government. Government, he supposes, ensures freedom, but can impinge upon it. Bentham favors negative liberty, or that freedom which is from external restraint. This is similar to previous accounts, such as those given by the philosopher John Locke; however, Bentham rejects basing any kind of right to freedom in nature (the state of nature). Therefore, the only kinds of laws are common, or legal, laws given by a government; so-called “natural laws”, which some suppose justify or invalidate some common laws, do not exist according to Bentham. Liberty is a good not because of some a priori reason, but because liberty reflects the greatest happiness principle. Advancing liberty is good insofar as it is pleasant and restricting it is bad insofar as it is painful to those who are restricted. The government, accordingly, protects community welfare, protecting economic and personal goods, and therefore reflecting the interests of the individual. Bentham’s view on rights follows a similar tract. He criticizes the doctrine of “natural rights” the same way he doubts the concept of “natural law”. Law, he says, creates rights, and law requires the existence of a government. There can be no rights outside of sovereign command; therefore, the concept of a “natural right” is a “perversion of language” (Parekh, 1973, p. 277). The existence of said natural rights, it seems, is based in social contract theory, which he rejects with equal fervor. Bentham also criticizes natural rights on the basis that there is no way that a government can enforce them and are therefore outside of the province of law; therefore, they offer us nothing but normative advice on what we ought to do. What Bentham maintains, however, is that there are legal rights (an extensive number of them in fact, as discussed in A General View of a Complete Code of Laws). A legal right is one afforded by a lawful authority, granting one an entitlement or permission to some object or act. According to Bentham, individuals only have rights insofar as they are bestowed to the individual by this common authority. What this means is that individual freedoms are contingent upon a government’s willingness to protect individual rights, which is the core of Bentham’s political philosophy. With respect to the criminal justice system, Bentham and utilitarianism in general left a profound impact on the way theorists talk about one very important issue: that of punishment. Theories of punishment are common and typically discuss either retribution or deterrence. Our intuitions tend to leave us thinking about punishment nearly always in terms of retribution for the wrongdoing. This is often the case with violent and unpreventable crimes. Throughout much of history, punishment has been justified on the grounds of retribution. However, Bentham’s utilitarianism, political philosophy, and manner of thinking together all combine to form a different way of thinking about punishment—as a means of deterrence. Deterrence prevents crime by deterring criminal activity in the first place. Deterrence is more consistent with the greatest happiness principle because it lessens the suffering of at least one individual involved in the criminal exchange. While such doctrines as “eye for an eye”, which is the case with retribution, deterrence attempts to avoid the crime altogether, and provides a utilitarian justification for punishment. According to Jerome Hall, “Bentham views punishment in a very different perspective. For him, it is an empirical question of desire and of the infliction of sufficient pain to provide an effective deterrent” (Hall, 2005, p. 312). Jeremy Bentham, as a philosopher, jurist, and statesman, bestowed upon the world a unique legacy and way of thinking. He led a group of progressive intellectuals looking to shake off the rusty old ways of economics and social classism in England. His ethical philosophy influenced John Stewart Mill, who would later become the world’s foremost proponent of the theory and ensured its long-lasting success. His account of ethics and politics alike are grounded in strict empiricism and a view of human nature. The theory of value he gave was completely based around appetites and aversions, corresponding to values and motivations. Happiness, taken as the supreme end, made possible the construction of a philosophical system justifying progressive and liberal ways of thinking. The changes Bentham contributed to making in England are enough to take into account here to support his significance in the history of Western thought. Despite Bentham’s wider acceptance of government interventionism later in his writings, he was consistently in favor of individual freedoms. He provided a unique basis for these freedoms and used his conception of rights as a proper means of justifying such freedoms. Bentham has surely been a great influence in the history of philosophy and will continue as a towering figure in the practice; even if we acknowledge Bentham’s words or not, we still owe much to his unique contributions, directly or indirectly. Works Cited Bentham, J. (2005). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Chicago: Adamant Media Corporation. Bentham, J. (1995). Panopticon. In M. Bozovic, The Panopticon Writings (pp. 29-95). London: Verso. Blumenau, R. (2002). Philosophy & Living. New York: Imprint Academic. Gruen, L. (2003, July 1). The Moral Status of Animals. Retrieved April 21, 2009, from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-animal/ Hall, J. (2005). General Principles of Criminal Law (2nd Edition ed.). Washington D.C.: Lawbook Exchange. Hart, H. L. (1982). Essays on Bentham: Jurisprudence and Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.(http://www.blupete.com/Literature/Biographies/Philosophy/Bentham.htm#Life Mill, J. (2003). Mill on Bentham. In M. Warnock, Utilitarianism and On Liberty: Including 'Essay on Bentham' and Selections from the Writings of Jeremy Bentham and John Austin (pp. 52-87). New York: Wiley-Blackwell. Parekh, B. C. (1973). Bentham's Political Thought. New York: Croom Helm. Read More