principle of utility

An idea due to Englishman Jeremy Bentham. Utility is that which "serves to increase human happiness," based on maximum pleasure and minimum pain overall - "the greatest happiness of the greatest number."

Legislators, therefore, should concern themselves with laws that achieve increased pleasures or avoidance of pains.

Bentham even defined a calculus for utility. It's generally held to be silly.

John Stuart Mill later expanded on these ideas.

A good action is that which provides the absolute most utility. Intentions are irrelevant.

What do you apply this principle to?

• Your Actions: If you're making an action, base it on what will produce the most utility. Problem: hard to calculate for each action. (How far into the future must I consider? What about the butterfly effect?)
• Rules: Select rules that will maximize utility. (example: don't lie) Problem: Degrades into Act Utilitarianism (more specific rules work better. 'Don't lie except to save a life'. 'a life other than Anthrax bacteria'. Eventually you get one for every action.)
• Practices: A practice is more encompassing than a rule. A practice such as stamp collecting has a set of rules (don't burn valuable stamps, don't eat too much glue, etc.) John Rawls, I believe, supports this, except I don't think he's a utilitarian. Hmmm...

What's this "utility" thing?

• Pleasure: Jeremy Bentham liked this one. # of Hedons vs. # of Dolars.
• Happiness: John Stuart Mill thought this was the coolest. Quality of Hedons and Dolars matter.
• Ideals: Justice, freedom, knowledge, whatever. A Good Thing, says G.E. Moore.
• Personal Preference: You want pleasure, so for you, utility is pleasure. I want happiness, so for me utility is happiness. What matters is how satisfied people are as a result of your actions. Proponent: Kenneth Arrow.

Who does this apply to?

• Rational Beings: Monkeys? Dogs? Highly-retarded humans?
• Ability to Suffer: The question isn't "can it think" but "can it suffer?" Dogs can. Cats can. Pigs can. Peter Singer thinks this is The Way To Go and I think Jeremy Bentham would agree.
• Future Generations: Do those who haven't been born yet have the right to be considered in the Hedonistic Calculus? (See re-population paradox for an interesting consideration.)

Hmmm.
Hedons from making this writeup better: 20.
Dolars from staying up for another half-hour to do so: 25.
Negative utility detected. Time for bed!

I just realised, I forgot to mention that this is used in the Utilitarian Theory of ethics. You know about Utilitarianism, don't you?