THE NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

Project

On

Utilitarianism and the Justification of Political Authority: Examining the

Works of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill
Submitted by
Rohit Misra
Enrolment Number: A-2475
Roll Number: 2022BALLB40
III Semester
B. A. LL. B. (Hons.)

submitted to
Prof. (Dr.) Raka Arya
Date of submission:
 DECLARATION

I, Rohit Misra S/o Ratnadip Misra Roll Number 2022BALLB40 Enrollment Number A-
2475 thus declare that the Project named “Utilitarianism and the Justification of Political
Authority: Examining the Works of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill” is the result
of my own independent study effort and was completed under the supervision of Prof (Dr.)
Seema Shrivastava. The literature on which I relied for this Project has been thoroughly and
totally recognised in the footnotes and bibliography. The project is not plagiarised, and every
reasonable precaution has been made to avoid plagiarism. According to the Turnitin Report,
the similarity index is %. If my project is determined to be plagiarised, the course instructor
has every authority to request that I alter it. If I do not follow the teacher's directions, my
project may be sent to the Committee Against Use of Unfair Means and I will comply with
any decision that may be made by the committee.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION.......................................................................................................................2

TABLE OF CONTENTS...........................................................................................................3

TITLE.........................................................................................................................................4

INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................4

REVIEW OF LITERATURE....................................................................................................5

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM..................................................................................................5

HYPOTHESIS...........................................................................................................................6

OBJECTIVES OF STUDY........................................................................................................6

RESEARCH QUESTIONS........................................................................................................6

METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................................................7

UTILITARIANISM...................................................................................................................8

Core Principles of Utilitarianism...........................................................................................9

Stances of Bentham and Mill on the function of political authority within a utilitarian
context..................................................................................................................................11

The ethical implications of utilitarianism in the context of individual rights and justice....12

Relevance and applicability of utilitarian philosophy to contemporary political and ethical

debates..................................................................................................................................14

CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................16

BIBLIOGRAPHY....................................................................................................................18
III SEMESTER PROJECT

TITLE

Utilitarianism and the Justification of Political Authority: Examining the Works of Jeremy
Bentham and John Stuart Mill

INTRODUCTION

Utilitarianism, an influential moral and political philosophy, has significantly shaped the
discourse on the justification of political authority over the centuries. This ethical framework,
championed by eminent philosophers like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill,
fundamentally contends that the legitimacy of political authority should be gauged by its
capacity to promote the greatest happiness or well-being for the greatest number of
individuals within a society. As one of the most prominent ethical theories, utilitarianism
seeks to rationalize and legitimize the exercise of political power, thereby addressing crucial
questions concerning the role of government and the rights of individuals.

The intellectual foundation of utilitarianism can be traced back to the 18th century
Enlightenment period, where a wave of philosophical ideas sought to challenge established
norms, notably the divine right of kings, and embrace the principles of reason, liberty, and
human welfare as the guiding lights for governance. Central to this philosophical upheaval
were the works of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, whose writings laid the groundwork
for the development and refinement of utilitarian thought. These two thinkers, though sharing
the core tenets of utilitarianism, offered nuanced perspectives on the justification of political
authority, bringing forth a rich tapestry of ideas that continue to reverberate through
contemporary discussions on governance, ethics, and public policy.

This essay embarks on an exploration of the utilitarian perspective on political authority,

examining the contributions of Bentham and Mill and the subtle differences in their
approaches. It delves into the philosophical underpinnings of utilitarianism, analyzing how
the pursuit of the greatest good for the greatest number can be harmonized with the principles
of justice, individual rights, and the ethical constraints that shape the exercise of political
power. Moreover, it aims to elucidate the enduring relevance of utilitarian thought in
contemporary political and ethical debates, as well as the challenges and criticisms that have
been leveled against it over time.
III SEMESTER PROJECT

In the following article, we will scrutinize the writings of these two seminal thinkers, each of
whom has left an indelible mark on the ethical and political landscape, and through this
exploration, gain a deeper understanding of the complexities inherent in the justification of
political authority within a utilitarian framework. Ultimately, this analysis endeavours to shed
light on the extent to which utilitarianism, as expounded by Bentham and Mill, can offer
cogent and morally compelling grounds for political authority, while simultaneously
recognizing the ethical dilemmas and objections that continue to test the resilience of this
influential philosophical doctrine in our ever-evolving world.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

 Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill (1861)

In this book, Mill advocates maximizing overall happiness as the ethical foundation,
prioritizing individual autonomy and higher pleasures. He clarifies utilitarian
principles, defends individual rights, and presents a comprehensive case for this
influential ethical theory.
 An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation by Jeremy
Bentham(1789)
Bentham discusses utility as the principle of maximizing happiness and minimizing
pain for the most people. Utility is a quantitative measure used in his utilitarian
philosophy to assess the moral and legislative value of actions or policies.
 Utilitarianism and the Justification of Political Authority by Peter Singer (1979)
This book explores the implications of utilitarianism for political theory. Singer
argues that utilitarianism justifies a limited form of government, but that it also places
important limits on the power of the state. He also discusses the implications of
utilitarianism for social justice and human rights..
 Bentham and Mill: Utilitarianism and Liberalism by David Lyons (1974)
This book provides a comprehensive and insightful comparison of Bentham and Mill's
utilitarian theories. Lyons examines their different views on the nature of happiness,
the role of government, and the importance of individual liberty.
III SEMESTER PROJECT

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

To explore the interplay between Bentham and Mill's utilitarian ideas, balancing happiness
and individual rights, to assess their implications for justifying political authority in modern
societies.

HYPOTHESIS

The examination of Bentham and Mill's utilitarian perspectives on political authority will
reveal the nuanced interplay between maximizing overall happiness and safeguarding
individual rights, providing insights into the justification of political authority in
contemporary contexts.

OBJECTIVES OF STUDY

 To analyse the core principles of utilitarianism in the works of Bentham and Mill.
 To examine the divergent perspectives on the role of political authority within the
utilitarian framework.
 To assess the ethical implications of utilitarianism in the context of individual rights
and justice.
 To identify areas of agreement and contention between Bentham and Mill regarding
the justification of political authority.
 To investigate the relevance and applicability of utilitarian philosophy to
contemporary political and ethical debates.
 To provide insights for policymakers and scholars on how utilitarianism can inform
political authority while addressing ethical dilemmas in governance.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

 How do Bentham and Mill delineate the fundamental tenets of utilitarianism in their
respective works?
 What are the distinctive stances of Bentham and Mill on the function of political
authority within a utilitarian context?
 What ethical considerations arise when evaluating utilitarianism in relation to issues
of justice and individual rights?
III SEMESTER PROJECT

 In what areas do Bentham and Mill's viewpoints converge or diverge regarding the
rationale behind political authority?
 How can utilitarianism offer practical insights into contemporary political and ethical
discussions?
 What lessons can policymakers and scholars draw from utilitarianism to guide
political authority decisions while addressing ethical quandaries in governance?

METHODOLOGY

This project has been made using the doctrinal method of research. Various primary sources
such as statutes and judgements as well as secondary sources like legal textbooks, journal
articles, and commentary articles were accessed to make this project. The information thus
collected was thoroughly studied and critically analysed.
III SEMESTER PROJECT

UTILITARIANISM

Utilitarianism is a consequentialist ethical theory that is often attributed to the work of

Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. It provides a framework for individuals to make moral
judgments based on the overall happiness or well-being that a specific action or decision is
expected to produce. As a normative theory, utilitarianism posits that the rightness or
wrongness of an action is determined by its consequences, rather than by the intrinsic nature
of the action itself. The central idea of utilitarianism is the principle of utility, which states
that the best action or decision is the one that maximizes the overall happiness or pleasure
and minimizes the overall suffering or pain for the greatest number of people.

The origins of utilitarianism can be traced back to the Enlightenment period in Europe during
the 17th and 18th centuries. Utilitarianism emerged as a response to the traditional moral
philosophy that prioritized religious doctrines and natural law theories. Key thinkers such as
Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill developed the foundational concepts of utilitarianism,
drawing inspiration from philosophers like David Hume and Pierre-Jean Grosley. Bentham,
in particular, sought to create a practical and rational moral theory that could guide
individuals and societies towards greater happiness and well-being. Utilitarianism gained
further prominence during the Industrial Revolution, as the rapid social and economic
changes demanded new ethical approaches to societal issues. 1 It offered a systematic
framework that prioritized the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people,
emphasizing the consequentialist aspect of moral decision-making.
Utilitarianism, as a consequentialist ethical theory, encompasses several key principles. The
first principle establishes that actions should aim to maximize overall happiness or utility
within a society. According to Bentham, the founder of utilitarianism, utility refers to the net
balance of pleasure over pain that an action brings to individuals affected by it. Moreover,
utilitarianism considers that each individual's happiness has equal moral worth, disregarding
any bias towards personal interests or preferences. As Jeremy Bentham famously stated,
"each to count for one and no more than one" 2. Additionally, utilitarianism emphasizes the
importance of impartiality by advocating for the maximization of happiness for the greatest
number of people3. Practically, this implies that the distribution of resources, benefits, and

1
William Shaw, 'Contemporary Ethics: Taking Account of Utilitarianism' (Wiley 1999).
2
John Stuart Mill, 'Utilitarianism' (Longman Green & Co. 1864).
3
Ibid.
III SEMESTER PROJECT

burdens should be based on the principle of utility, ensuring the greatest overall happiness.
Thus, key principles of utilitarianism encompass maximizing overall happiness, equal
consideration of each individual's happiness, and impartiality in distributing happiness among
the greatest number of individuals.

Core Principles of Utilitarianism

Two influential philosophers, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, have extensively
explored the philosophy of utilitarianism in their respective works. Bentham's principle of
utility is founded upon the hedonistic calculus, which seeks to maximize pleasure and
minimize pain as the measure of utility. On the other hand, Mill expands on Bentham's
utilitarianism by introducing the concept of higher pleasures, which prioritize intellectual and
moral satisfaction over mere physical pleasure.4

Bentham’s perspective

Jeremy Bentham, a pioneering philosopher of the 19th century, developed a comprehensive

perspective on utilitarianism that greatly influenced the field of ethics. Bentham's primary
aim was to establish a moral framework that maximizes general happiness and minimizes
pain and suffering. In his work, "Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,"
Bentham argues that an act is morally right if it produces the greatest amount of happiness for
the greatest number of people.5He emphasizes the importance of calculating the overall
consequences of an action, focusing on the net effect it has on the happiness of all individuals
involved. Bentham's approach to utilitarianism is often referred to as "act utilitarianism," as it
assesses the moral worth of individual actions based on their immediate consequences. His
emphasis on quantifying pleasure and pain, and his utilitarian calculus for determining the
sum total of utility, demonstrate Bentham's meticulous and scientific approach to ethics. This
perspective, although widely critiqued and adapted by subsequent philosophers, lays the
foundation for understanding the fundamental tenets of utilitarianism.6

J.S. Mill’s perspective

John Stuart Mill, a prominent British philosopher, expanded and refined Jeremy Bentham's
utilitarianism in his seminal work "Utilitarianism." Mill's perspective on utilitarianism can be

4
Lynda S. Sharp, 'Forms and Criticisms of Utilitarianism' (University of Oxford 1974)
5
Jeremy Bentham, 'An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation' (Oxford University Press 1789).
6
Ibid.
III SEMESTER PROJECT

characterized by his emphasis on qualitative pleasure and his recognition of higher and lower
pleasures. Mill argued that not all pleasure is of equal value and that intellectual, emotional,
and moral pleasures hold greater importance than physical pleasures. He believed that a life
focused solely on the pursuit of physical pleasure would be fundamentally unsatisfying and
intellectually impoverished. In contrast to Bentham's quantitative approach, Mill's perspective
on utilitarianism emphasizes the quality of pleasure and posits that the ultimate goal of
utilitarianism should be the maximization of higher intellectual and moral pleasures, thereby
promoting individual happiness and the greater good for society as a whole.

Comparison between the perspectives

In comparing the views of Bentham and Mill on utilitarianism, an essential point of

distinction lies in their differing approaches to the concept of happiness. Bentham’s utilitarian
theory hinges on the principle of "the greatest happiness for the greatest number," where he
suggests that actions ought to be evaluated based on their ability to produce the maximum
amount of pleasure and minimize pain for the majority of people. On the other hand, Mill
expands upon Bentham’s theory by emphasizing the quality, rather than the quantity, of
happiness as the ultimate goal. Mill argues that not all pleasures are equal and that intellectual
or higher-order pleasures provide greater utility than physical or lower pleasures. He posits
that intellectual pursuits, such as those related to art, literature, and philosophy, bring about
long-lasting contentment and fulfilment. This striking difference between Bentham and
Mill’s views highlights their respective interpretations of utility and the role of pleasure and
happiness within utilitarianism.

Critiques

Critiques and challenges to utilitarianism arise from both within and outside the philosophical
community. One major criticism is the challenge of quantifying and comparing different
types of pleasures and pains, which Jeremy Bentham attempts to address by proposing a
hedonic calculus7. However, this approach has been met with scepticism, as critics argue that
it reduces human well-being to a purely quantitative measure, ignoring the qualitative aspects
of pleasure. Furthermore, some argue that utilitarianism disregards individual rights and
autonomy, as it prioritizes the maximization of overall happiness or utility over individual
liberties.8 John Stuart Mill acknowledges these criticisms and seeks to address them in his

7
Raymond Gillespie Frey, 'Utility and Rights' (U of Minnesota Press 1984).
8
James Patrick Léger, 'A Critique of Bernard Williams' Recent Challenge to Utilitarianism' (St. Mary's
University 1980).
III SEMESTER PROJECT

work by introducing qualitative distinctions between higher and lower pleasures and
emphasizing the importance of individual autonomy. He argues that higher pleasures, such as
intellectual pursuits and moral sentiments, should be given greater weight in the calculation
of overall happiness, thus valuing quality over pure quantity. Mill's response to these
critiques adds depth and nuance to the utilitarian framework, aiming to address some of its
perceived deficiencies.9

Stances of Bentham and Mill on the function of political authority within a utilitarian
context
Although both Bentham and Mill advocate for the overall happiness principle, their
respective stances on the function of political authority within a utilitarian context exhibit
distinct.

Bentham's Stance on the Function of Political Authority within a Utilitarian Context

Bentham's stance on the function of political authority within a utilitarian context differs from
Mill's in several key ways. According to Bentham, the primary goal of political authority is to
promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. He argues that the purpose
of government is to maximize utility by implementing policies and legislation that lead to the
overall happiness and well-being of society. Bentham posits that political authority should
strive to minimize pain and maximize pleasure, as these are the ultimate measures of utility.
Furthermore, Bentham emphasizes the importance of impartiality in decision-making,
asserting that political authority should act in the best interests of everyone, rather than
favouring a particular group or individual. This aligns with his belief that utilitarianism is
inherently democratic, as the interests and happiness of the majority should always take
precedence over the interests of the few.

Mill's Stance on the Function of Political Authority within a Utilitarian Context

In contrast to Bentham, Mill takes a more nuanced stance on the function of political
authority within a utilitarian context. Mill argues that the primary purpose of political
authority is not merely to maximize the overall happiness or pleasure of society, as Bentham
suggests, but to safeguard individual liberties and protect minority interest. According to
Mill, political authority should act as a powerful check against the encroachment of majority
tyranny and serve as a means to secure individual freedom and autonomy. He asserts that the
cultivation of individuality and diversity of opinions is essential in order to foster progress

9
III SEMESTER PROJECT

and intellectual growth in society. Mill emphasizes the importance of a vibrant public sphere,
protected by a just and fair political system, where individuals can freely express their views
and challenge societal norms. While Mill acknowledges the significance of overall utility, he
maintains that political authority should not merely act as the tyrannical will of the majority,
but should adhere to principles that safeguard the rights and liberties of all individuals. Thus,
Mill offers a more nuanced understanding of the function of political authority in a utilitarian
framework, striking a balance between overall happiness and the protection of individual
liberties.

Comparison of Bentham and Mill's Stances on the Function of Political Authority within a
Utilitarian Context

Furthermore, another notable difference between Bentham and Mill lies in their conceptions
of political authority within a utilitarian framework. Bentham argues that political authority
should primarily aim at maximizing utility by focusing on the greatest happiness for the
greatest number of individuals. In other words, the function of political authority, according
to Bentham, is to ensure the overall happiness of the majority. On the other hand, Mill
emphasizes the importance of individual freedom and the protection of individual rights, even
if it means limiting the power of political authority. Mill contends that political authority
should not only promote the greatest happiness but also safeguard individual liberties, as they
are essential for the development and fulfillment of each person's potential. Thus, Mill sees
the function of political authority as a means to create an environment that allows individuals
to flourish and lead autonomous lives. Overall, while both Bentham and Mill place
importance on maximizing utility, their divergent stances on political authority within a
utilitarian context stem from their differing views on the role of individual freedom and
rights.10

The ethical implications of utilitarianism in the context of individual rights and justice
This theory has been widely debated and has generated numerous discussions about its
ethical implications, particularly in relation to issues of justice and individual rights. The
evaluation of utilitarianism in these contexts raises a range of ethical considerations that
require careful examination.11 One must grapple with questions such as how utilitarianism
can be reconciled with the idea of justice, which emphasizes fairness and equitable treatment
for all individuals. Additionally, concerns arise regarding how the pursuit of utility, or
10
Jeremy Bentham, 'An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation' (Oxford University Press
1789).
11
William Shaw, 'Contemporary Ethics: Taking Account of Utilitarianism' (Wiley 1999).
III SEMESTER PROJECT

maximizing overall happiness, might encroach upon individual rights and liberties. 12 These
ethical considerations form the basis for a comprehensive analysis of utilitarianism and its
intersection with justice and individual rights.

Ethical Considerations in Utilitarianism

The ethical considerations in utilitarianism are complex and multifaceted, particularly when
examining its relation to issues of justice and individual rights. Firstly, utilitarianism's focus
on maximizing overall happiness or well-being can potentially lead to the neglect or violation
of the rights and freedoms of specific individuals or minority groups. As Singer argues, an
excessive emphasis on the aggregate happiness may result in the sacrifice of individual
autonomy and dignity. Secondly, the utilitarian principle of impartiality raises concerns about
justice and fairness, as it fails to adequately address the concept of distribution and the
allocation of resources. Critics contend that prioritizing group happiness may
disproportionately benefit the majority at the expense of disadvantaged individuals. Thirdly,
utilitarian calculus is often challenged by the ambiguity surrounding the measurement of
happiness and pleasure. Although Bentham initially proposed a quantitative approach, the
calculation of utility based on a single metric has been strongly criticized as oversimplifying
human experiences. In sum, ethical considerations in utilitarianism necessitate careful
examination of potential infringements on individual rights, the principles of justice and
fairness, and the reliability of the happiness calculus.

Utilitarianism and Issues of Justice

Utilitarianism, as a consequentialist ethical theory, focuses on maximizing overall happiness

and minimizing overall suffering for the greatest number of people. However, when applying
this theory to issues of justice and individual rights, ethical considerations arise. One concern
is the potential for utilitarianism to overlook the protection of minority rights. According to
Mill, utilitarianism prioritizes the well-being of the majority over the minority, which raises
concerns about the fairness and justice of such an approach. Furthermore, the utilitarian
principle of aggregating individual happiness fails to account for the inherent value and
dignity individuals possess, as well as the importance of individual autonomy and freedom.
Critics argue that utilitarianism's focus on maximizing overall happiness may justify
infringing on individual rights, potentially leading to the oppression of certain individuals or
groups. Another ethical consideration is the potential for utilitarianism to ignore the historical
context and societal power dynamics that may perpetuate social injustices. By placing
12
John Rawls, 'A Theory of Justice' (Harvard University Press, Original Edition 2009).
III SEMESTER PROJECT

emphasis solely on overall happiness, utilitarianism disregards the need to rectify past
injustices and address systemic inequalities that continue to impact marginalized
communities. In this way, utilitarianism's failure to adequately address issues of justice,
individual rights, and historical injustices raises ethical concerns and highlights the
limitations of this moral framework.13

Utilitarianism and Individual Rights

Within the framework of utilitarianism, the ethical considerations surrounding issues of

justice and individual rights present complex challenges. One of the key criticisms of
utilitarianism is that it tends to prioritize overall happiness or the greatest good for the
greatest number, potentially disregarding the rights of minority individuals or vulnerable
populations. As argues, utilitarianism fails to provide a strong foundation for protecting
individual rights since it emphasizes the importance of maximizing utility and can justify
actions that infringe upon the rights of individuals for the sake of achieving the greatest
overall happiness. Additionally, consequentialist theories like utilitarianism often rely on the
aggregation of individual preferences without adequately accounting for the existence of
certain fundamental rights that should not be sacrificed for collective interests. For instance,
if a utilitarian calculation suggests that infringing upon the rights of a few individuals will
lead to a greater societal benefit, this approach risks undermining the principle of fairness and
equal treatment enshrined in the concept of individual rights.

Relevance and applicability of utilitarian philosophy to contemporary political and

ethical debates

Utilitarianism in Contemporary Political Discussions

Utilitarianism, as a consequentialist ethical theory, plays a significant role in shaping

contemporary political discussions by offering practical insights into pressing issues. For
instance, the utilitarian principle of maximizing overall happiness and minimizing overall
harm provides a basis for addressing policy debates such as healthcare reform. By evaluating
different healthcare models in terms of the overall well-being they generate for the society,
utilitarianism directs policymakers to prioritize the greatest good for the greatest number.
Utilitarianism can also inform discussions on the allocation of limited resources, especially

13
Mark J. Kaswan, 'Happiness, Democracy, and the Cooperative Movement: The Radical Utilitarianism of
William Thompson' (SUNY Press 2014).
III SEMESTER PROJECT

during times of crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. For instance, utilitarian reasoning
can guide decisions about the distribution of medical supplies, vaccines, and financial aid,
ensuring that resources are allocated to those who are most in need and to areas where they
can have the greatest impact on reducing suffering. This practical application of utilitarianism
highlights its relevance in addressing contemporary political challenges.14

Utilitarianism in Contemporary Ethical Discussions

Utilitarianism has proven to be influential in contemporary ethical discussions, particularly in

the realm of political decision-making. One area where utilitarianism offers practical insights
is through its emphasis on maximizing overall social welfare. This ethical theory recognizes
the need to consider the consequences of actions, making it applicable in dilemmas such as
balancing individual liberties and public safety. For instance, in debates on issues like
surveillance and privacy, utilitarianism urges policymakers to weigh the potential benefits of
enhanced security against the infringement on individuals' privacy rights. 15 By utilizing a
utilitarian framework, authorities can determine whether security measures that potentially
violate privacy are justified based on the overall welfare they provide to society at large.
Additionally, utilitarianism's focus on promoting the greatest good for the greatest number of
people is also relevant in discussions surrounding resource allocation and public policy. For
example, during times of scarcity, utilitarianism offers insights on how to distribute limited
resources equitably to maximize overall societal well-being. Therefore, utilitarianism's
practical application helps inform contemporary ethical discussions by providing a systematic
approach that balances competing interests and promotes societal well-being.

Criticisms of Utilitarianism with respect to the above parameters

One of the major criticisms that utilitarianism faces is the issue of justice. Critics argue that
the utilitarian principle of maximizing overall happiness or pleasure fails to adequately
consider the rights and interests of individuals. As John Rawls points out, utilitarianism
disregards the importance of individual rights and may justify the sacrifice of some for the
greater good. According to Rawls, justice should be based on fairness, which means
respecting the basic rights and liberties of all individuals. Furthermore, critics argue that
utilitarianism often ignores the long-term consequences or impacts of actions. Peter Singer,
for instance, criticizes the tendency of utilitarianism to prioritize short-term pleasures over
long-term sustainability and global welfare. These criticisms raise important questions about
14
Raymond Gillespie Frey, 'Utility and Rights' (U of Minnesota Press 1984).
15
William H. Shaw, 'Contemporary Ethics: Taking Account of Utilitarianism' (Wiley 1999).
III SEMESTER PROJECT

whether utilitarianism can truly provide practical insights into contemporary ethical and
political discussions, as it may fail to sufficiently protect individual rights and account for
long-term consequences.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our exploration of utilitarianism and the justification of political authority

through the lenses of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill has shed light on the intricate
interplay between ethics, governance, and individual liberties. Both philosophers, while
anchored in the utilitarian framework of maximizing overall happiness, offered nuanced
perspectives that highlighted the ethical dimensions and limitations of political authority.

Bentham's utilitarianism, with its emphasis on the quantitative measurement of pleasure and
pain, presented a more utilitarian calculus in assessing the legitimacy of political authority.
His work laid the groundwork for a pragmatic approach to governance, focusing on the
maximization of collective welfare as the ultimate goal. Bentham's belief in the rationality of
individuals and the importance of minimizing suffering has had a lasting influence on public
policy and legal thought, advocating for the greatest good for the greatest number.

Conversely, John Stuart Mill's contribution introduced a more refined and ethically grounded
utilitarianism, emphasizing not just the quantity but also the quality of pleasures. Mill's "harm
principle" underscored the importance of individual rights and autonomy, establishing a
crucial boundary for the exercise of political authority. His works have resonated with
modern discussions on liberty, justice, and the protection of minority rights, advocating for a
more nuanced approach to governance that safeguards individual freedoms.

Our examination has revealed that utilitarianism, as expounded by these two seminal
thinkers, provides a compelling framework for assessing the justification of political
authority. Yet, it also underscores the tension between the pursuit of collective happiness and
the safeguarding of individual rights. Contemporary political and ethical debates continue to
grapple with these complexities, seeking to strike a balance between the utilitarian goals of
societal welfare and the preservation of individual liberties.

As we reflect on the enduring relevance of Bentham and Mill's utilitarianism, we recognize

the invaluable lessons they offer to policymakers and scholars. Their insights illuminate the
ethical considerations that should guide political authority, encouraging a thoughtful and
balanced approach that accounts for both collective well-being and the protection of
III SEMESTER PROJECT

individual rights. This examination of utilitarianism in the context of political authority

serves as a reminder that the quest for a just and effective governance system necessitates a
continuous dialogue between utilitarian ethics and the principles of justice, liberty, and
individual autonomy.
III SEMESTER PROJECT

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 William Shaw, 'Contemporary Ethics: Taking Account of Utilitarianism' (Wiley

1999).
 Lynda S. Sharp, 'Forms and Criticisms of Utilitarianism' (University of Oxford 1974).
 Jeremy Bentham, 'An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation'
(Oxford University Press 1789).
 John Stuart Mill, 'Utilitarianism' (Dover Publications 1863).
 James Patrick Léger, 'A Critique of Bernard Williams' Recent Challenge to
Utilitarianism' (St. Mary's University 1980).
 Mark J. Kaswan, 'Happiness, Democracy, and the Cooperative Movement: The
Radical Utilitarianism of William Thompson' (SUNY Press 2014).
 J. S. Mill, 'Utilitarianism' (Dover Publications 1863).
 Raymond Gillespie Frey, 'Utility and Rights' (U of Minnesota Press 1984).
 John Rawls, 'A Theory of Justice' (Harvard University Press, Original Edition 2009).
 William H. Shaw, 'Contemporary Ethics: Taking Account of Utilitarianism' (Wiley
1999).
 Tim Mulgan, 'Understanding Utilitarianism' (Routledge 2014).