Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-f46jp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-20T17:21:04.530Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Utility’ and the ‘Utility Principle’: Hume, Smith, Bentham, Mill

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2009

Douglas G. Long
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

David Hume, Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill are often viewed as contributors to or participants in a common tradition of thought roughly characterized as ‘the liberal tradition’ or the tradition of ‘bourgeois ideology’. This view, however useful it may be for polemical or proselytizing purposes, is in some important respects historiographically unsound. This is not to deny the importance of asking what twentieth-century liberals or conservatives might find in the works of, say, David Hume to support their respective ideological persuasions. It is only to insist that attempts to use selected arguments, or parts of arguments, from great eighteenth-century thinkers to shore up twentieth-century programmatic political positions must be categorically distinguished from attempts to understand what Hume, Smith, Bentham or Mill actually meant, or could imaginably have meant, to say.

Type
Research Article
Information
Utilitas , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , May 1990 , pp. 12 - 39
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Skinner, Quentin, ‘Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas’, History and Theory, viii (1969), 7.Google Scholar

2 ‘While [Smith] is consistently hostile to utility both as an explanation for the origin of moral rules and as a principle to be applied routinely in everyday circumstances, it is to the criterion of utility … that he has recourse in his evaluation of practices, institutions, and systems as a whole.’ Campbell, T. D. and Ross, I. S., ‘The Utilitarianism of Adam Smith's Policy Advice’, Journal of the History of Ideas, xlii (1981), 73–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Campbell, T. D., Adam Smith's Science of Morals, London, 1971, pp. 217–20.Google Scholar

3 Winch, Donald, Adam Smith's Politics, Cambridge, 1978, p. 184CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Winch refers the reader to Burrow, J. W., Evolution and Society: a Study in Victorian Social Theory, Cambridge, 1965Google Scholar, Chapters 1–3 for a full discussion of this issue.

4 Winch, , p. 181.Google Scholar

5 Ibid., p. 184.

6 See Jeremy Bentham's Economic Writings: critical edition based on his printed works and unpublished manuscripts, ed. Stark, W., 3 vols., London, 1952–1954, ii. 318ff.Google Scholar

7 ‘Bentham's utilitarianism is a highly interventionist creed …’: see James, M. H., ‘Public Interest and Majority Rule in Bentham's Democratic Theory’, Political Theory, ix (1981), 62Google Scholar. ‘I have not … any horror, sentimental or anarchical, of the hand of government. I leave it to Adam Smith, and the champions of the rights of man … to talk of invasions of natural liberty, and to give as a special argument against this or that law, an argument the effect of which would be to put a negative upon all laws.’ ‘Defence of a Maximum’, in Bentham's Economic Writings, iii. 257–58.Google Scholar

8 See note 2 above.

9 On Jurisprudence, see Haakonssen, 's The Science of a Legislator, Cambridge, 1981CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Postenia, 's Bentham and the Common Law Tradition, Oxford, 1986Google Scholar. On Political Economy, see for example Hollander, S., ‘The Role of Bentham in the Early Development of Ricardian Theory’, Bentham Newsletter, iii (1979), 2–17Google Scholar, and Black, R. D. C., ‘Bentham and the Political Economists of the Nineteenth Century’Google Scholar, Ibid., xii (1988), 24–36.

10 See ‘A Table of the Springs of Action: Marginals—Added Observations’, in Deontology: together with A Table of the Springs of Action and Article on Utilitarianism, ed. Goldsworth, A., Oxford, 1983Google Scholar (The Collected Works of Jeremy Bentham), p. 29Google Scholar (hereafter cited as Deontology).

11 Ibid., p. 24.

12 Ibid., p. 55.

13 Ibid.

14 Ibid., p. 23.

15 Ibid., p. 55.

16 Ibid., p. 28.

17 Largely completed by 1780 but revised in 1789 just before publication. Ch. II, para. 11, note c, in which the principle of sympathy and antipathy, the principle of caprice and the phantastic principle are discussed, was first printed in 1789. See An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, ed. Burns, J. H. and Hart, H. L. A., London, 1970Google Scholar (CW), pp. 21–4Google Scholar (hereafter cited as IPML).

18 IPML (CW), Ch. II, para. 11, p. 21.Google Scholar

19 See Hobbes, , Leviathan, Book I, Ch. 5–6.Google Scholar

20 See IPML (CW), Ch. II, para. 11, note c, p.Google Scholar

21 Ibid., para. 11, p. 25.

22 Ibid., para. 12, p. 25.

23 Ibid., para. 13, p. 25.

24 Deontology, (CW) p. 35.Google Scholar

25 Ibid., p. 47.

26 Ibid.

27 See above at note 16.

28 See IPML (CW), ‘Preface’, pp. 8–9.Google Scholar

29 See UC lxix. 10Google Scholar. Discussed in Long, D., Bentham on Liberty, Toronto, 1978, p. 17.Google Scholar

30 UC xxvii. 4Google Scholar: Draft ‘Introduction’ to ‘The Elements of Critical Jurisprudence’, a work Bentham regarded in the 1770s as his projected magnum opus.

31 UC xxvii. 6Google Scholar. Bentham appears to have understood (correctly) the gap which separated his own approach from Montesquieu's as a result of the latter's reliance on the idea of Laws of Nature: see UC lxx. 9Google Scholar, ‘INTRODUCTION “LAW”. Its different Senses collated.’

32 See Long, D., ‘Censorial Jurisprudence and Political Radicalism’, The Bentham Newsletter, xii (1988), 4–23.Google Scholar

33 In De L'Esprit, or Essays on the Mind and its Several Faculties by C. A. Helvétius, translated [anonymously] from the French, to which is now prefix'd a Life of the Author, new edn., New York, 1970Google Scholar; see the ‘Life’, p. xiv.Google Scholar

34 See Deontology (CW), ‘Editorial Introduction’, p. xiii and n2.Google Scholar

35 UC xxvii. 3.Google Scholar

36 Ibid.

37 MS. orig. ‘Propositions’.

38 UC xxvii. 5Google Scholar: ‘PREFAT. Dictionary of Moral terms. Helvétius. IV.’

39 UC xxvii. 34Google Scholar: ‘Pleasures and Pains. How measured.’ In the same passage, Bentham observes that Maupertuis, , in his Essay on Moral Philosophy, London, 1750Google Scholar, had anticipated Beccaria's use of this method of analysis, but had ‘pursued it but by halves’, and had made a ‘fundamental error’ in his definition of pleasure.

40 UC lxx(a). 23Google Scholar: ‘Helvétius X Beccaria.’

41 UC lxx(a). 30Google Scholar: ‘INTROD. Pr. of Utility reprobated. Grotius, Pufendorf.’

42 UC lxix. 118Google Scholar: ‘Introd. Jurisprudence whether susceptible of Demonstration.’

43 See A Comment on the Commentaries and A Fragment on Government, ed. Burns, J. H. and Hart, H. L. A., Oxford, 1977Google Scholar (CW), p. 439Google Scholar (hereafter cited as Comment/Fragment): i.e. Fragment, Ch. 1, para. 36, note v, pt. 1.

44 Ibid.

45 Ibid., p. 440.

46 Norton, D. F., David Hume: Common-Sense Moralist, Sceptical Metaphysician, Princeton, 1982.Google Scholar

47 In Comment/Fragment (CW), ‘Appendix-Preface for the Second Edition [of] the Fragment’ (1822), p. 509.Google Scholar

48 See ibid., pp. 508–9, n3.

49 This quotation and the preceding analysis are from Hume, 's Treatise of Human Nature, ed. Selby-Bigge, L. A., 2nd edn., Oxford, 1973Google Scholar, Book III, Part III, Section I: ‘Of the origin of the natural virtues and vices’, pp. 574–75.

50 Ibid., pp. 577–78.

51 Comment/Fragment (CW), p. 440Google Scholar; i.e. Fragment, Ch. I, para. 36, note v, part 2.

52 Ibid., p. 441.

53 See ‘Concerning the Principles of Morals’, Section III, Part II, in Hume, 's Enquiries concerning Human Understanding and concerning the Principles of Morals, ed. Selby-Bigge, L. A., 3rd edn. revised by P. H. Nidditch, Oxford, 1975, p. 203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

54 See ‘Of the Original Contract’, in Hume, : Essays Moral, Political, and Literary, ed. Miller, E. F. (Liberty Classics), Indianapolis, 1985, Part II, Number XII, p. 479.Google Scholar

55 Ibid., p. 480.

56 Comment/Fragment (CW), p. 440Google Scholar: i.e. Fragment, Ch. I, para. 36, note v, part 2.

57 Deontology (CW), p. 57.Google Scholar

58 See above at note 49.

59 See Deontology (CW), pp. 345–63, especially at p. 345.Google Scholar

60 Ibid., p. 347.

61 See IPML (CW), ‘Preface’, pp. 8–9.Google Scholar

62 See Hume: Enquiries, ‘… concerning the Principles of Morals’, Section V, Part 1, pp. 212–18.Google Scholar

63 Ibid., p. 215.

64 Ibid., pp. 212–13.

65 Being susceptible to pleasure and pain, animals, unlike inanimate objects, may be said to have interests which the law ought to protect: ‘The question is not, can they reason? nor can they talk? but, can they suffer?’; see IPML (CW), Ch. 17, para. 4 and note 6, p. 283n.Google Scholar

66 See above at note 49.

67 IPML (CW), Ch. I, para. 2, note b, pp. 11–12.Google Scholar

68 See above at note 3.

69 See Smith, Adam, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, ed. Campbell, R. H., Skinner, A. S. and Todd, W. B., 2 vols., Oxford, 1976Google Scholar (The Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith), pp. 247, 325, 354, 412, 445, 790–91.Google Scholar

70 Ibid., p. 790.

71 Hume, , Treatise, Introduction, p. xv.Google Scholar

72 Ibid., p. xvi.

73 Ibid., p. xvii.

74 See The New Science of Giambattista Vico, trans. Bergin, T. G. and Fisch, M., New Haven, 1968, para. 401 ff.Google Scholar

75 See Rousseau, 's ‘Essay on the Origin of Languages, in which something is said about Melody and Musical Imitation’, Chs. 1–4, and especially Ch. 3Google Scholar, in Jean-Jacques Rousseau: The First and Second Discourses … and Essay on the Origin of Languages, trans, and ed. Gourevitch, V., New York, 1986, pp. 240–48.Google Scholar

76 See Frye, 's The Great Code: The Bible and Literature, New York, 1982Google Scholar, Part 1: ‘The Order of Words’, Chapter 1: ‘Language I’, pp. 5–15.

77 Rousseau, , ‘Origin of Languages’, p. 246.Google Scholar

78 Frye, , p. 5.Google Scholar

79 Ibid., p. 6.

80 Ibid., p. 5.

81 Ibid., p. 7.

82 See Adam Smith: Essays on Philosophical Subjects, ed. Wightman, W. P. D. and Bryce, J. C., Oxford, 1980Google Scholar (The Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith), pp. 33–106Google Scholar. His essays on ‘The History of the Ancient Physics’ and ‘The History of the Ancient Logics and Metaphysics’ are parts of the samp explanatory project. See Ibid., pp. 106–33.

83 Smith, , History of Astronomy, pp. 45–6.Google Scholar

84 Smith, Adam, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, ed. Macfie, A. L. and Raphael, D. D., Oxford, 1976Google Scholar (The Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith), Part IV, ‘Of the Effect of Utility upon the Sentiments of Approbation’, Ch. 1, pp. 179–87Google Scholar: ‘Of the beauty which the appearance of UTILITY bestows upon all the productions of art, and of the extensive influence of this species of Beauty’, at p. 185. Cf. Hume, , Treatise, Book II,-Part II, sec. V, pp. 363–65.Google Scholar

85 Ibid., p. 183.

86 Frye, , p. 12Google Scholar. Presumably the use of ‘existence’ rather than ‘being’ here is carefully premeditated. The criterion of ‘existence’ is experiential. That of ‘being’ may be metaphysical, as in Plato.

87 Ibid., p. 5.

88 Ibid., p. 13.

89 Ibid.

90 Ibid., p. 14.

91 On ‘paraphrastic definition’, see Harrison, R., Bentham, London, 1983, pp. 53–74.Google Scholar

92 Frye, , p. 14.Google Scholar

93 ‘Metaphysics, the most sublime and useful of all human sciences, according as it is applied, or the most futile,’ UC lxix. 155Google Scholar. See also Long, , Bentham on Liberty, pp. 68–9.Google Scholar

94 See UC lxix. 52–3, 227, 228, 241Google Scholar. Discussed in Long, , ‘Censorial Jurisprudence and Political Radicalism’, 14.Google Scholar

95 UC xxvii. 45Google Scholar. Discussed in Long, , Bentham on Liberty, p. 65.Google Scholar

96 Theory of Moral Sentiments, Editorial Introduction, pp. 5–10.Google Scholar

97 Ibid., p. 6.

98 Of Laws in General (CW), ed. Hart, H. L. A., London, 1970Google Scholar, Ch. 10, Section iv, ‘Alterative [Laws]’, para. 16, p. 120.Google Scholar

99 Notes 53–5 above.

100 Lectures on Jurisprudence, ed. Meek, R. L., Raphael, D. D. and Stein, P. G., Oxford, 1978Google Scholar (The Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith), p. 319.Google Scholar

101 Moral Sentiments, II. ii. 3.1–2, p. 88.Google Scholar

102 Ibid., pp. 85–6.

103 IPML (CW), Ch. I, para. 2, p. 12.Google Scholar

104 Ibid., para. 3, p. 12.

105 Ibid., para. 4, p. 12.

106 Ibid., para. 5, p. 12.

107 Ibid., para. 6, pp. 12–13.

108 Ibid., para. 9, p. 13.

109 UC lxx(a). 17Google Scholar: ‘INTRODUCTION. Utility etc. Definiend[a].’

110 Ibid.

111 IPML (CW), Ch. I, para. 1, note a, p. 11.

112 See above at notes 3 & 4.

113 Mill, J. S., On Liberty and Other Writings, ed. Collini, Stefan, Cambridge, 1989 (Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought), p. 14.Google Scholar

114 See Long, , Bentham on Liberty, p. 148.Google Scholar

115 Mill, to Chapman, John, 9 06 1851Google Scholar, in Later Letters, ed. Mineka, F. E. and Lindley, D. N., Toronto, 1972Google Scholar (Collected Works of John Stuart Mill vols, xiv–xvii), xiv. 68.Google Scholar

116 Essays on Philosophy and the Classics, ed. Robson, J. M., Toronto, 1978Google Scholar (Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, vol. xi), xi. 419.Google Scholar

117 Ibid., p. 44.

118 A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive, ed. Robson, J. M., Toronto, 1974Google Scholar (Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, vols, vii and viii), viii. 949.Google Scholar

119 On Liberty, ed. Robson, J. M., Toronto, 1977Google Scholar (Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, vol. xviii), xviii. 224.Google Scholar