1. The Principles of Morals and Legislation – Chapter 17, Section IV
Jeremy Bentham
A Utilitarian View
The Principles of Morals and Legislation – Chapter 17, Section IV

2. Background Info 15 February 1748 – 6 June 1832, English jurist
Was considered a child prodigy -  He was found as a toddler sitting at his father's desk reading a multi-volume history of England, and he began to study Latin at the age of three.
The original designer of the “Panopticon” that Michel Foucalt mentions a lot.
John Stuart Mill, the other famous “Utilitarian” is actually Bentham’s secretary’s(James Mill) son.
When Bentham died, he requested in his will that his body be dissected as a public lecture and that his head be mummified and put on display in a cabinet known as the ‘Auto-Icon’.

3. Kant
Kant’s definition of Happiness: Getting what one wants. “… a mere idea of a state to which he would make his instincts adequate..” [5:430] but is never possible. “what the human being understands by happiness and what is in fact his own ultimate natural end would still never be attained by him…” [5:431]
Kant distinguishes animals from humans on the basis of rationality

4. Bentham Ethics
XVII.II “Ethics at large may be defined, the art of directing men’s actions to the production of the greatest possible quantity of happiness, on the part of those whose interest is in view.”
Happiness defined: The predominance of "pleasure" over "pain".
Bentham’s Benchmark: the “insuperable line”. “The question is not, Can they reason? Nor, can they talk? But, can they suffer?” – He argues that the ability to suffer and not the ability to reason should be the insuperable line.

5. Bentham’s Animal Rights
Rationality does not have anything to do with whether we are special with respect to animals. It’s all about happiness.
“Animals are never worse for being dead”
“(Animals) have none of those long-protracted anticipations of future misery which we have” – Because of Rationality?

6. Discussion Question 1
Does Bentham think animals suffer more or less than humans? What are, for him, the implications of the answer to this question? Are there contradictions concerning his position as this appears in the text? Is he in favour of vegetarianism, given his position on animal suffering, or not? Why not?
To Bentham, animals are not rational. Humans are rational. Rational beings suffer more than irrational beings because we have long protracted anticipations of future misery. Therefore humans suffer more than animals?

7. Discussion Question 2
Does Bentham think that humans are animals? Does he think there are any significant or important differences between humans and animals and what are the possible implications?
In which cases, does the ‘insuperable line’ become debatable?

8. Discussion Question 3
Bentham mentions animal rights in the passage. What are his arguments for those rights and what might these rights be?

9. Bentham’s Felicific Calculus
Intensity: How strong is the pleasure?
Duration: How long will the pleasure last?
Certainty or uncertainty: How likely or unlikely is it that the pleasure will occur?
Propinquity or remoteness: How soon will the pleasure occur?
Fecundity: The probability that the action will be followed by sensations of the same kind.
Purity: The probability that it will not be followed by sensations of the opposite kind.
Extent: How many people will be affected?