Claire+J.+Bentham+B

Section 1: Photo Booth Interview media type="youtube" key="P1inLkYKjr0" height="344" width="425" **Script:** Anker/Chung: Welcome to CJ’s Philosopher News! Today, reporter Claire will have an interview with Jeremy Bentham, the most famous utilitarianism philosopher. Now let’s see what reporter Claire has for us. Claire: Good Evening to all philosophers and viewers, I am reporter Claire and I am out here with Mr. Bentham. Hello Mr. Bentham. B: Good Evening Ms. Jung. Claire: Thank you for you precious time, and now I would like to ask you some questions about your famous theory, utilitarianism. Can you first explain to us what is utilitarianism? B: Yes, utilitarianism is my main philosophy. Utilitarianism is a philosophy that John Stuart Mill and I have supported greatly. I have stated in //An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislature// about Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism simply states that happiness or pain adds up among all people because the nature has placed mankind among the two. Also the rightness of an action depends entirely on the consequence. So if an action creates more pain or can’t reduce the pain, the action would be wrong. Same on the other hand, if an action creates more happiness or reduces pain, the action would be right. And for utilitarianism to be useful, individuals should give up some of their happiness in order for the great number of people to gain happiness. Claire: I couldn’t understand at first, but the example you gave in the end really helped me understand your philosophy. Another question just came up in mind relating to utilitarianism. Why did you believe in utilitarianism the first place? B: Hmmm. Perhaps the famous philosopher, Joseph Priestley has influenced me the most. After reading his //The First Principles of Government and the Nature of Political, Civil and Religious Liberty,// I began to realize that I have been passive throughout my life. I never thought of amending laws or even had an interest in it, but after reading this book, it changed me to believe that the nature of law was random. Later in effort to change the nature of law, I have come to my philosophy of utilitarianism which made logical sense that laws should create more happiness than pain in order for laws to stay correct and just. Claire: Ah, so there was a behind story to your philosophy of utilitarianism. Now, tell us what you tried to solve with utilitarianism. I am sure you didn’t just come up with that, so where did you try to apply it? B: Surely I, the man once called prodigy, have not just come up with random philosophy. As I explained before, I have come up with utilitarianism since I believed the nature of law was random. I also thought that the English Constitution was lacking in measuring utility so I wrote the //Fragment on Government//. I wanted for the legislature to understand utilitarianism so they can make good laws that are actually useful and practical. Claire: I see that you are trying very hard to make changes in politics. Do you have any other philosophy concerning politics? B: Yes, I do. Actually my Fragment on Government explains all about what I think of the government and law. I view the law in a negative aspect. Since liberty is freedom and thus pleasant, restriction on the other hand must be painful. Since law restricts liberty, it is painful and thus negative. But I think that the government’s role is positive and pleasant since it can further benefit the society by keeping order thus giving the members of the society happiness. I also am deeply opposed the French Revolution’s Declaration of Rights of Men. Since rights can be defined many ways, it is true that no order would be in the society in the broad term “rights.” Claire: Hmmm, now I begin to think that democracy might be a broad term for the society to be in order. But looking at utilitarianism, I think democracy does give the most happiness to the mass. Am I correct Mr. Bentham? B: Brilliant! I just wanted to say that to summarize my thoughts, but since you stole my line, I have nothing to say! Claire: Thank you for your compliment and your cooperation on this interview. B: Thank you for listening to my philosophy. I hope that the others would understand my philosophy and work accordingly, especially the legislature. Claire: I’m sure they did. I had a wonderful time with you and back to you Ms. Chung Anker/Chung: That was an enlightening interview. I hope all of you enjoyed it and next time, we will have an interview with John Stuart Mill, who also supported utilitarianism. Thank you for watching.


 * Section 2:Searching For Primary or Secondary Sources**

**"Jeremy Bentham." __Spartacus Educational - Home Page__. 7 Dec. 2008 . **   **"Jeremy Bentham." __Utilitarianism : past, present and future__. 7 Dec. 2008 . **   **"Jeremy Bentham." __World History: The Modern Era__. 7 Dec. 2008 . **    **Primary Sources** Bentham, Jeremy. "An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation." __Jeremy Bentham__. 6 Dec. 2008 .
 * Secondary Sources**
 *  "Jeremy Bentham [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]."  __The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy - IEP__. 7 Dec. 2008  **

"Extracts from Jeremy Bentham." __Middlesex University London > Home__. 7 Dec. 2008 .

**An Introduction to the Morals and Legislature**

=
The principle of utility is the foundation of the present work: it ======

=
will be proper therefore at the outset to give an explicit and determinate ======

=
account of what is meant by it. By the principle of utility is meant that ======

=
principle which approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever. ======

=
according to the tendency it appears to have to augment or diminish the<span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> ======

=
happiness of the party whose interest is in question: or, what is the same<span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> ======

=
thing in other words to promote or to oppose that happiness. I say of<span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> ======

=
every action whatsoever, and therefore not only of every action of a<span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> ======

=
private individual, but of every measure of government.<span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> ======

1.In Bentham's point of view, how is an action defined as right or wrong?2.What is utility and how does it relate to the point that Bentham is trying to make in this document?

**Fragment on Government** - Correspondent to discovery and improvement in the natural world, is reformation in the moral; if that which seems a common notion be, indeed, a true one, that in the moral world there no longer remains any matter for discovery. Perhaps, however, this may not be the case: perhaps among such observations as would be best calculated to serve as grounds for reformation, are some which, being observations of matters of fact hitherto either incompletely noticed, or not at all would, when produced, appear capable of bearing the name of discoveries: with so little method and precision have the consequences of this fundamental axiom, it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong, been as yet developped. - Be this as it may, if there be room for making, and if there be use in publishing, discoveries in the natural world, surely there is not much less room for making, nor much less use in proposing, reformation in the moral. If it be a matter of importance and of use to us to be made acquainted with distant countries, surely it is not a matter of much less importance, nor of much less use to us, to be made better and better acquainted with the chief means of living happily in our own: If it be of importance and of use to us to know the principles of the element we breathe, surely it is not of much less importance nor of much less use to comprehend the principles, and endeavour at the improvement of those laws, by which alone we breathe it in security. If to this endeavour we should fancy any Author, especially any Author of great name, to be, and as far as could in such case be expected, to avow himself a determined and persevering enemy, what should we say of him? We should say that the interests of reformation, and through them the welfare of mankind, were inseparably connected with the downfall of his works: of a great part, at least, of the esteem and, influence, which these works might under whatever title have acquired. 1. What problems does Bentham see with the English Constitution? 2. How does utilitarianism (in the 1st primary source) apply to //Fragment on Government//? 3. What is Bentham's view on the interest of reformation? What examples does he give to support his stance on the interest of reformation?