A measure for pleasure?

Can pleasure be measured in terms of quantity as well as quality? What’s more pleasurable to a ten-year-old – a kitten, a teddy bear, or a bar of chocolate? Can we turn a subjective concept like pleasure into an objective measure or comparison? A man called “Jeremy” thought so.

Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) was an English philosopher, jurist, and social reformer, best known for his contributions to utilitarianism. Born in London, Bentham was a leading figure in the fields of ethics and political philosophy during the 18th and 19th centuries.

Bentham’s most influential idea was utilitarianism, a moral and ethical theory that asserts that the best action is the one that maximizes overall happiness or pleasure. According to Bentham, individuals should strive to act in a way that brings about the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. To measure happiness and pleasure, Bentham developed the principle of “hedonistic calculus,” which aimed to quantify and compare the intensity, duration, certainty, and other factors of pleasure and pain.

In addition to his work on ethics, Bentham made significant contributions to legal philosophy. He advocated for legal and social reforms based on utilitarian principles. Bentham believed that laws and institutions should be designed to maximize happiness and minimize suffering in society.

Bentham’s ideas had a profound impact on the development of ethical and legal thought, and his legacy continues to influence discussions on utilitarianism, ethics, and social policy to this day.

Bentham developed a system known as the “Felicific Calculus” to objectively measure pleasure and pain. He proposed that the value or utility of any action, policy, or decision could be quantified and compared based on the amount of pleasure and pain it produced. The Felicific Calculus consisted of several criteria that Bentham believed could be used to evaluate and compare different actions or choices. These criteria included:

1. Intensity: The strength or intensity of the pleasure or pain experienced as a result of an action. Bentham believed that stronger pleasures or pains should be given greater weight.
2. Duration: The length of time that the pleasure or pain lasts. Longer-lasting pleasure or pain was considered more valuable.
3. Certainty or uncertainty: The likelihood that the pleasure or pain will occur. Certain pleasures or pains were considered more valuable than uncertain ones.
4. Propinquity or remoteness: The nearness or farness in time of the pleasure or pain. Pleasures or pains that are more immediate were given greater weight.
5. Fecundity: The likelihood that a pleasure will lead to more pleasures in the future or that a pain will lead to more pains. Actions that produced pleasures with higher fecundity were considered more valuable.
6. Purity: The extent to which an action produces only one type of pleasure or pain rather than a mixture of both. Actions that resulted in “pure” pleasures were considered more valuable.
7. Extent: The number of people or beings who experience the pleasure or pain as a result of the action. Actions that produced pleasure or prevented pain for a greater number of individuals were considered more valuable.

By using these criteria, Bentham aimed to provide a systematic and objective way to assess and compare the overall utility or goodness of different actions or policies. This utilitarian approach to ethics sought to maximize overall pleasure and minimize pain often referred to as the “greatest happiness principle.” However, it’s important to note that the Felicific Calculus has been subject to criticism and challenges, and not all philosophers or ethicists accept it as a comprehensive or infallible method for measuring pleasure and pain.

However, measuring pleasure in an objective and quantitative manner is challenging because pleasure is a subjective experience. Different individuals may have different preferences, and what brings pleasure to one person may not necessarily do the same for another. Additionally, the quality of pleasure can be influenced by personal, cultural, and contextual factors.

In the case of a ten-year-old and the choices of a kitten, a teddy bear, or a bar of chocolate, the preference for one over the others would likely vary among individuals. Some children might find joy in the companionship of a kitten, comfort in a teddy bear, or delight in a bar of chocolate. The choice depends on the child’s individual preferences and experiences.

While Bentham’s hedonistic calculus provides a framework for attempting to measure pleasure and pain objectively, it has limitations, especially when it comes to the inherently subjective nature of individual experiences. The complexity of human emotions and the diverse factors influencing pleasure make it challenging to create a universally applicable and objective measure of pleasure. Consequently, the subjective nature of pleasure remains a significant aspect of ethical and philosophical discussions.

Thank you for reading my writings. If you’d like to, you can buy me a coffee for just £1 and I will think of you while writing my next post! Just hit the link below…. (thanks in advance)