Utilitarianism: Doctrinal analysis evolution of thought

Autor

  • Olgierd Górecki University of Lodz, Faculty of Law and Administration, Department of Political and Legal Doctrines

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1899-2226.20.5.11

Słowa kluczowe:

utilitarianism, doctrinal analysis, evolution

Abstrakt

Utilitarianism as an innovative and original stream of ethical and political thought has enriched the philosophical discourse of the last three centuries. Utilitarian thinkers claim that maximization of pleasure correlated with minimization of pain is the correct way to create an objective catalog of rules or behaviors that result in the formation of the highest utility for a society and its individuals. From a methodological perspective, there are differences among the utilitarian philosophers on issues such as: happiness, pleasure or utility guide to diametrical disaccord on an ethical or institutional area. The present analysis of the utilitarian thought represents some of the interesting differences in interpretation of this doctrine. However, utilitarianism does not include logical or intellectually strong arguments for the protection of an individual’s rights against the interest of people at large. Thus, this doctrine during the 18th and the 19th centuries postulated the political egalitarianism. Nowadays, utilitarianism has lost its strong ethical position. In the past, utilitarianism was a political instrument to protect most of the people in a society from an arbitrary reigning of small elite groups. In recent times, this thought legitimizes the coercion of the majority will regardless of the fact that other smaller groups may have different political views. Such thinking allows to objectify the individual man which is only identified with instrumentality to maximization of utility. The author analyzes the writings of Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill and Herbert Spencer, and compares their doctrines with the scientific literature and forwards a basic thesis on the universal principles of utilitarianism. The author argues that the actual rules of political ethics under conditions of limitation theory of utility append the law of inviolability of the natural rights of an individual.

Bibliografia

Berlin, I. (1969). Four essays of liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Boaz, D. (2005). Libertarianizm. Poznań: Zysk i S-ka.
Google Scholar

Copleston, F. (1989). Historia filozofii (Vol. VIII). Warszawa: Instytut Wydawniczy PAX.
Google Scholar

Górecki, O. (2010). Korelacja etyki z gospodarką w etyce Herberta Spencera. Annales. Ethics in Economic Life, 13(2), 59–69.
Google Scholar

Gray, J. (1994). Liberalizm. Kraków: Społeczny Instytut Wydawniczy Znak.
Google Scholar

Häyry, M. (1994). Liberal utilitarianism and applied ethics. London: Routledge Press.
Google Scholar

Hofstadter, R. (1945). Social Darwinism in American thought 1860–1915. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Google Scholar

Hołówka, J. (1995). Wstęp. In J. S. Mill, O rządzie reprezentatywnym. Kraków: Społeczny Instytut Wydawniczy Znak.
Google Scholar

Hudzik, J. P., (2002). Wykłady z filozofii polityki, Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej.
Google Scholar

Kasprzyk, L. (1961). Idee społeczno-polityczne Herberta Spencera. Kraków: Stenotypia.
Google Scholar

Kasprzyk, L. (1967). Spencer. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Wiedza Powszechna.
Google Scholar

Kelly, P. (2007). Liberalizm. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Sic!
Google Scholar

Kowalczyk, S. (1995). Liberalizm i jego filozofia. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Unia.
Google Scholar

Król, M. (2008). Filozofia polityczna. Kraków: Znak.
Google Scholar

Kwaśnicki, W. (2000). Historia myśli liberalnej. Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne.
Google Scholar

Kymlicka, W. (2009). Współczesna filozofia polityczna. Warszawa: Aletheia.
Google Scholar

Ludwikowski, R., & Woleński, J. (1979). J.S. Mill. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Wiedza Powszechna.
Google Scholar

MacIntyre, A. (2000). Krótka historia etyki. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Google Scholar

Mill, J. S. (1995). O rządzie reprezentatywnym. Kraków: Społeczny Instytut Wydawniczy Znak.
Google Scholar

Mill, J. S. (2005). Utylitaryzm. O wolności. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Google Scholar

Quinton, A. (1989). Utilitarian ethics. London: Gerald Duckworth.
Google Scholar

Rau, Z. (2000). Liberalizm. Zarys myśli politycznej XIX i XX w. Warszawa: Aletheia.
Google Scholar

Rau, Z. (2008). Zapomniana wolność. W poszukiwaniu historycznych podstaw liberalizmu. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
Google Scholar

Rosenblum, N. L. (1978). Bentham’ theory of the modern state. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar

Sheng, C. L. (1991). A new approach to utilitarianism. A unified utilitarian theory and its application to distributive justice. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Google Scholar

Sheng, C. L. (1998). A utilitarian general theory of value (Value Inquiry Book Series, Vol. 61). Amsterdam: Brill Rodopi.
Google Scholar

Spencer, H. (1851). Social statics, or the conditions essential to human happiness specified, and the first of them developed. London: John Chapman.
Google Scholar

Spencer, H. (2002). Jednostka wobec państwa. Warszawa: Liber.
Google Scholar

Szahaj, A., & Jakubowski, M. N. (2005). Filozofia polityki. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Google Scholar

Środa, M. (2003). Indywidualizm i jego krytycy. Warszawa: Aletheia.
Google Scholar

Taylor, M. W. (2000). Men versus the state. Herbert Spencer and late Victorian individualism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Google Scholar

Tulejski, T. (2004). Od zasady użyteczności do demokracji. Filozofia polityczna Jeremy Benthama. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.
Google Scholar

Vardy, P., & Grosch P. (1995). Etyka. Poglądy i problemy. Poznań: Zysk i S-ka.
Google Scholar

White, S. (2008). Równość. Warszawa: Sic!
Google Scholar

Wroczyński, R. (2002). Wstęp. In H. Spencer, O wychowaniu umysłowym, moralnym i fizycznym. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Akademickie Żak.
Google Scholar

Opublikowane

2019-02-12

Jak cytować

Górecki, O. (2019). Utilitarianism: Doctrinal analysis evolution of thought. Annales. Etyka W Życiu Gospodarczym, 20(5), 141–153. https://doi.org/10.18778/1899-2226.20.5.11

Numer

Dział

Artykuł