Pleasure and pain, the only masters
What actually governs what people do, and what alone can measure good and bad? Bentham answers with two sovereign masters, pleasure and pain, and refuses any third standard.
Nature has placed mankind under two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure; from that opening Bentham builds the whole machinery. Good and bad reduce to them and to nothing else, so a legislator can weigh any act by the pleasure and pain it brings, gauged by intensity, duration, certainty and nearness. A famous footnote asks whether the capacity to suffer, not to reason or to speak, is what earns a creature moral standing, a line the movement against cruelty to animals later claimed. Sentiment and intuition are dismissed as disguised preference.
- utility
- sensibility
- psychology
- ethics
- punishment
Enter a dialogue
- When a person can no longer tell duty from mere preference, how do your two masters give them a way to decide?
- Doesn't measuring good by pleasure and pain flatten the difference between a noble life and a merely comfortable one?
- How should someone separate a genuine moral judgement from a feeling they have simply dressed up as principle?
- To accept pleasure and pain as the only standards, what comforting ideas about conscience must a person set down?
- You ask whether the capacity to suffer, not reason, earns moral standing; what does that demand of how a person treats an animal?