ভূমিকা

Shiavault - a Vault of Shia Islamic Books Concept of Justice, Utilitarianism and Other Modern Approaches (B) Utilitarianism and notion of justice Utilitarianism as an ethical political and legal theory is essentially a product of the English mind. It is essentially associated with Jermy Bentham and John Stuart Mill.

The theory believes that man is social by nature and is always motivated in life chiefly by the desire to obtain happiness and avoid pain and that the happiness of each individual involves relations with other individuals which necessitates state regulation of mutual relations of men by legislation. Utilitarian philosophy is thus closely associated with practical ethics and practical politics.

The object of legislation of the state is to promote and secure the greatest happiness of the greatest number. The criterion of right and wrong of good and bad which the state should apply is found in happiness and not in divine revelation, dictates of conscience or in the abstract principles of reason.

It insisted that all political institutions and public offices must be judged by their fruits and not by their ideality, i.e., by their actual effects on the happiness of the people and not by their conformity to the theories of natural rights or absolute justice. Thus this theory is based on the psychological doctrine of hedonism which proceeds on the assumption that man is a sentient being, a creature of feeling and sensibility.

The principle of utility or the greatest happiness of the greatest number is the measuring rod by which utilitarian measure and evaluate the public policies and legislative enactments of governments. The state is a necessity for the promotion of the greatest happiness of the greatest number and it is a means, not an end in itself.

Thus, Bentham does not recognize individual's human rights and therefore the idea of justice is merely a subordinate aspect of utility.5 His principle of justice is an implicit part of utility as incorporated in a legislation. It, therefore, seems that his theory of justice is justice according to law as laid down in a legislation. He was not prepared to recognize a general or specific human right to justice because he had no respect for natural rights.