Julien Miller
Dr. Drolet
Western Political Thought
October 12, 2015
Does Bentham’s Utilitarianism lead logically to a strong theory of Democracy
or does it result in benevolent despotism?
A leading theorist in Anglo-American law, Jeremy Bentham is recognized as having
developed many of the fundamental characteristics associated with modern society. Throughout
his many publications he advocated for individual and economic freedom, the separation of church
and state, freedom of speech, equal rights for women and the decriminalizing of homosexual acts.
During the early 19th century, Bentham grew disillusioned with the failure of government to
address a variety of new issues that occurred due to rapid urbanization.1 Operating under the
assumption that the government must accept responsibility for promoting economic progress,
social welfare and social order, Bentham believed that the administration could be rendered more
pure and more efficient if the problem were tackled the right way. Ultimately, Bentham dedicated
his life to this cause, producing theories of statecraft and writing a unified code of law for much of
the remainder of his life.
The cornerstone of all of Bentham’s thought is the moral philosophy of Utilitarianism.
Defined in The Principles of Morals and Legislation, the principle of utility takes for its
fundamental axiom, that the greatest happiness of the greatest number is the measure of right and
wrong. Bentham argued that all human activity could be simplified to either pleasure or pain and
that these should serve as the basis for all decision making. “Nature has placed mankind under the
governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we
ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do. On the one hand the standard of right and
wrong, on the other the chain of causes and effects, are fastened to their throne. They govern us
in all we do, in all we say, in all we think…”2 Bentham believed that by operating under this
principle of utility, individuals, society and government could all achieve a higher degree of
rationality. He even developed a method for calculating utility in order to make utility’s dictates
1
Schofield, Philp. Utility and Democracy: The Political Thought of Jeremy Bentham (Oxford
Univ. Press, 2006)
2
Jeremy Bentham, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1996). p.11
1
take the form of exigencies rather than choices.
He further suggested that it was the
responsibility of rulers to allow utility to govern their actions, even if the demands of
utilitarianism were bound to conflict with traditional morality as well as their private
inclinations.
In 1830, Bentham published The Constitutional Code, a comprehensive legal document
that defined his view of government, society and the legal entities that should serve to maintain
order. Like the rest of his work, the principle of utility serves as the foundation on which the
Constitutional Code is based. In writing the code, Bentham translated and elaborated certain
general theories into a number of principles and devices that could be applied to government and
applied in an administrative setting. At the same time he selected, modified and restated certain
administrative principles and devices in order to reconcile them with his general theories, and tried
to provide them with an adequate institutional basis. Among the most important and revolutionary
aspects of the Constitutional Code is Bentham’s advocacy for democratic values and more
specifically for universal suffrage. Whilst there is no necessary connection between utilitarianism
and democracy, the democratic principles of Bentham’s Constitutional Code rest firmly on a
utilitarian foundation.
This essay will seek to demonstrate the logical connections between
Bentham’s democracy and the principle of utility.
The Legislator
Bentham’s conception of government necessitated a leading figure that would apply the
principle of utility at the helm of the state. He repeatedly refers to this individual as the
‘Legislator’. Underlying the notion of the legislator is the desire for a new and stable order and
the belief that someone with sufficient wisdom could design laws to unite men and secure their
happiness. Bentham’s image of the legislator was modeled closely after ancient lawgivers Solon
and Lycurgus.3 The legislator is represented as a man of peculiar virtue and special knowledge
who works alone and may be a stranger to the place he remakes. 4 He further describes the
legislator as a man who comes from afar so that the people are assured that he is neutral in their
affairs, “without interest, connection or dependence.” In essence, Bentham’s Constitutional
3
4
Rosenblum, N. Bentham's Theory of the State (Harvard Univ. Press, 1978) p.10
Rosenblum, N. Bentham's Theory of the State p.13
2
Code required a leader who embodied the notion of a single rationality based on the principle of
utility.
This very particular description of what leadership should entail seems to lend itself far
more to a despot who could act unilaterally than an elected official dependent upon his
constituency. Nonetheless, Bentham’s discussion of diversity reveals that while he is drawn to
the notion of a single divine figure replacing the role of modern politics within a state, he
understands this is not feasible. He explains that the modern state is a political order that takes
as its aim the expression and satisfaction of changing and conflicting desires. Therefore, politics
are necessary for the state to be representative of the desires of society. In particular, the politics
that occur over the course of a democratic election allow the desires of individual members of
society to be announced and for trends to be established. It is then up to politicians to respond
accordingly. By selecting a ‘legislator’ in this way, the elected government will be best suited to
maximize utility in the decisions they take.
Strategy of Reform
In this vein, it is imperative to consider Bentham’s conception of the way that
individual’s interests can be reconciled with the general interest. In keeping with his utilitarian
framework, Bentham regarded the general interest of a community to be the sum of the interests
of the members who compose it.5 In discussing general interest, Bentham specifies that he is
referring to the happiness that generally stems from security, subsistence, abundance and
equality. The issue of welfare programs for the homeless can serve as an example in which
individual interests are reconciled with the general interest. A wealthy merchant feels virtually
no pain when the government decides to reduce the number of homeless shelters and addiction
clinics in a given community. The homeless man, on the other hand, is significantly affected.
He goes from having a place to sleep to sleeping on the street. Now, every time the wealthy
merchant walks to work he must navigate streets full of homeless people, there is considerably
more garbage in the streets and crime has increased such that he no longer feels safe. Now he
begins to feel the adverse affects of the government policy and begins to feel ‘pain’. Moreover,
every time he watches the news or reads a newspaper he is made aware of the deteriorating
5
Jeremy Bentham, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation p.12
3
condition of the community’s homeless. It becomes in the interest of the wealthy merchant and
other members of the upper echelons of society to address the issue. In a democracy, this is
facilitated by the obligation of elected officials to consider the interests of their constituents. In
this way, democracy allows for individual’s interest to align with the general interest.
The presence of newspapers, radio, television reports, online news, etc. is particularly
relevant to Bentham’s advocacy for universal suffrage. He referred to this phenomenon as the
public opinion tribunal. The Constitutional Code contains a striking passage about the power and
importance of public opinion: “To the pernicious exercise of the power of government it is the
only check; to the beneficial, and indispensable supplement. Able rulers lead it; prudent rulers
lead or follow it; foolish leaders disregard it.
Even at the present stage in the career of
civilization, its dictates coincide, on most points, with those of the greatest happiness principle;
on some, however, it still deviates from them: but, as its deviations have all along been less and
less numerous, and less wide, sooner or later they will cease to be discernible, aberration will
vanish, coincidence will be complete.” 6 Public opinion plays a significant role in the
reconciliation of individual’s interests and general interest. Democracy allows reform to occur
within the political system. In a monarchy or dictatorship, rulers have far less incentive to abide
by the interests of their constituents.
Psychological Egoism
In considering Bentham’s affinity for constitutional democracy it is imperative to
consider his understanding of basic human psychology. Bentham established that in all humans
there is a propensity for self-regard as well as for sympathy. He suggests that while these exist
in different proportions in different people, self-regard is a more fundamental characteristic than
sympathy. He reasons that this is the case because one cannot live without self-regard while one
can live without sympathy. “If Adam thought only of Eve and never of himself and Eve thought
similarly of Adam, sooner or later the two would have perished.”7 It is within the confines of
these two basic traits that Bentham forms his view of the role of the utilitarian legislator.
6
Rosen, Frederick. Jeremy Bentham and Representative Democracy (Oxford Univ. Press, 1983)
p.21
7
Rosen, Frederick. Jeremy Bentham and Representative Democracy p.207
4
In writing the Constitutional Code, Bentham reveals that he does not hold the human
capacity for virtuousness in high esteem. He states plainly, “whatsoever evil it is possible for
man to do for the advancement of his own private and personal interest … at the expense of the
public interest, - that evil, sooner or later, unless by some means or other, intentional or
otherwise, prevented from doing it.” 8 This pessimistic view of human nature lends itself to
democracy because elected officials risk being dismissed by their constituents every time they do
anything at the expense of the public interest. Bentham’s Constitutional Code takes this into
account and defines the role of the utilitarian legislator accordingly. “To give increase to the
influence of sympathy at the expense of that of self-regard, and of sympathy for the greater
number at the expense of sympathy for the lesser number, - is the constant and arduous task, as
of every moralist, so of every legislator who deserves to be so.”9 It is imperative to remember
that legislators are subject to the same fundamental human characteristics as the citizens of the
state. Therefore, it is unlikely to find a legislator virtuous enough to put the interests of the state
above their own. Democracy offers an excellent way to align these interests. By legislating in
the interests of the citizenry, a democratically elected legislator is acting in self-regard, namely in
order to maintain their elected position. Accordingly, under Bentham’s Constitutional Code,
rulers are not trusted to behave wisely and benevolently; nor are they allowed to serve only
themselves. They are induced to act benevolently in a limited sense by the threat of punishment
if they harm those they rule in order to serve themselves.10
Equality
Another aspect of Bentham’s principle of utility that lends itself to the establishment of a
democracy is the notion of equality. Under Bentham’s understanding of the state, all people’s
pains and pleasures were valued equally. His felicific calculus makes no distinction between the
happiness of a wealthy male aristocrat and the happiness of a female laborer. Moreover, as
Bentham refined his definition of the greatest happiness principle he elaborated on the subject of
equality. He explains that government is to maximize the greatest happiness “of all of them,
without exception, in so far as possible, is to render the provision of an equal quantity of
8
Rosen, Frederick. Jeremy Bentham and Representative Democracy p.208
Rosen, Frederick. Jeremy Bentham and Representative Democracy p.209
10
Rosen, Frederick. Jeremy Bentham and Representative Democracy p.210
9
5
happiness for everyone.” In doing so, he is clearly indicating that his principle of greatest
happiness should be understood as egalitarian.
As previously suggested, the basic disposition of human kind renders it unlikely for a
legislator to be impartial and benevolent towards minorities and the lower classes without
democracy. Universal suffrage, in particular, makes the happiness of every citizen significant to
the legislator. More importantly, when the legislator uses felicific calculus to make decisions for
the state he must now include the pains and pleasures of every citizen of the state into his
calculation. Without democracy, the ‘ruling few’ are likely to adopt policies augmenting their
pleasure at the expense of pain to the ‘ruled many’. Bentham addresses this issue directly as he
speaks of an equal distribution of power as well as wealth. In keeping with his psychological
understanding of mankind he stipulates that the greater the concentration of power in society, the
greater the tendency will be to abuse it. “Hence, with a movement towards greater equality of
power (presumably in the replacement of monarchy with a representative democracy based on
universal suffrage) there will be less opportunity for the abuse of power and consequently more
happiness.”11
Conclusion
Unlike many of his contemporaries, Bentham was incredibly sensitive to the fragility of
political order. His ambition was not only to put forth a form government that would more
adequately deal with the issues of the time, but also to establish a form government that would
ensure stability and achieve the maximum level of happiness for society for many years to come.
He was particularly concerned with the sinister influence of man’s fundamental egoism in the
political and social system.
By writing the Constitutional Code he sought to protect society
from the avarice of man by establishing robust institutions and allowing public opinion to play a
central role in reform. His most powerful antidote for psychological egoism, however, was
universal suffrage and the values of democracy. By establishing a sense of equality in society
and allowing for seamless policy change democracy advanced the interests of the community,
which was to say, for Bentham, the greatest possible happiness of the community.
11
Rosen, Frederick. Jeremy Bentham and Representative Democracy p.217
6
Sources:
Jeremy Bentham, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1996).
Anderson, B. ‘Mill on Bentham: From Ideology to Humanised Utilitarianism’, History of Political
Thought, 4, 1983.
Bahmueller, Charles F. The National Charity Company (Univ. California Press, 1981)
J. Crimmins, ‘Betham’s Political Radicalism Re-examined’, Journal of the History of Ideas, 55, 2,
1994.
Dinwiddy, John. Bentham. (Oxford Univ. Press, 1989)
Evans, Robin. The Fabrication of Virtue (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1982)
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish (Penguin, 1977)
Halevy, Elie. The Growth of Philosophical Radicalism. (ARK editions, 1989)
Harrison, R. Bentham (Macmillan, 1983)
Hume, L.J. Bentham and Bureaucracy (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1981)
Kelly, P.J. Unitilitarianism and Distributive Justice, Jeremy Bentham and the Civil Law (Oxford
Univ. Press, 1990)
Ogden, C.K. Bentham's Theory of Fictions (Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1932)
Postema, Gerald. Bentham and the Common Law Tradition (Oxford Univ. Press, 1986)
Rosenblum, N. Bentham's Theory of the State (Harvard Univ. Press, 1978)
Rosen, Frederick. Jeremy Bentham and Representative Democracy (Oxford Univ. Press, 1983)
Rosen, Frederick. Bentham, Byron, and Greece (Oxford Univ. Press, 1992)
Rosen, Frederick, 'Introduction' to Jeremy Bentham, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals
and Legislation. (Oxford Univ. Press, 1996)
Semple, Janet. Bentham's Prison (Oxford Univ. Press, 1992)
Schofield, Philp. Utility and Democracy: The Political Thought of Jeremy Bentham (Oxford Univ.
Press, 2006)
7
8