The Experts below are selected from a list of 309 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Robert Winston - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Sir Robert Edwards (1925–2013): Creator of the Greatest Happiness
PLoS Biology, 2013Co-Authors: Robert WinstonAbstract:“Give me children; else I am as dead”. The desperate cry of Rachel to her husband Jacob, whose life is meaningless whilst she remains sterile, rings down the ages [1], a cry still heard in both developed countries and less affluent ones. Until recently, this pain has been largely ignored or belittled, as it was by Jacob.
-
sir robert edwards 1925 2013 creator of the Greatest Happiness
PLOS Biology, 2013Co-Authors: Robert WinstonAbstract:“Give me children; else I am as dead”. The desperate cry of Rachel to her husband Jacob, whose life is meaningless whilst she remains sterile, rings down the ages [1], a cry still heard in both developed countries and less affluent ones. Until recently, this pain has been largely ignored or belittled, as it was by Jacob.
Ruut Veenhoven - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Happiness as a priority in social policy: The Greatest Happiness principle
2015Co-Authors: Ruut VeenhovenAbstract:Attempts to improve the human lot begin typically with treating compelling miseries, such as hunger and epidemics. When these problems are solved, attention shifts to broader and more positive goals; we can see this development in the history of social policy, the goal of which has evolved from 'alleviating poverty' to providing ‘a decent standard of living' for everybody. The field of medicine has witnessed a similar shift from assisting people to ‘survive’ to, in addition, promoting a good ‘quality of life’. This policy change has put some nasty questions back on the agenda, such as: “What is a good life?”, “What good is the best?” The social sciences cannot provide good answers to these questions, since they have also focused on misery. Yet, a good answer can be found in a classic philosophy, and it is one that is worth reconsidering.
-
Greatest Happiness for the Greatest Number
Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research, 2014Co-Authors: Ruut VeenhovenAbstract:__Abstract__\ud \ud The Greatest Happiness principle is a moral tenet, which holds that the best thing to do is what contributes to the Greatest Happiness of the Greatest number of people
-
Greatest Happiness FOR THE Greatest NUMBER
2014Co-Authors: Ruut Veenhoven, Alex C. MichalosAbstract:3.1 History of the idea During the Middle Ages, it was widely believed that Happiness is not possible in earthly life and that the basis of morality was in the word of God. These views were contested in the “Enlightenment”; Happiness came to be seen as attainable, and morality was regarded as man-made. A lively discussion on the relation between Happiness and morality emerged, and in this climate, an instrumental view on morality appeared, in which ethical codes are seen as ways of securing a happy life. Much of this enlightened thought is reflected in Jeremy Bentham’s (1907) “Introduction to morals and legislation.” Bentham argues that the moral quality of an action should be judged by its consequences on human Happiness, and in that line, he claims that we should aim at the “Greatest Happiness for the Greatest number.” Bentham defined Happiness in terms of psychological experience, as “the sum of pleasures and pains.” His philosophy is known as “ utilitarianism,” because of its emphasis on the utility of behavioral consequences. “Happyism” would have been a better name, since this utility is seen as a contribution to Happiness.
-
Inequality-Adjusted Happiness (IAH)
2014Co-Authors: Ruut VeenhovenAbstract:markdownabstract__Abstract__ According to the utilitarian creed, the quality of a society should be judged using the degree of Happiness of its members, the best society being the one that provides the Greatest Happiness for the Greatest number. Following the egalitarian principle, the quality of a society should be judged by the disparity in Happiness among citizens, a society being better if differences in Happiness are smaller. Performance on these standards can be measured using cross-national surveys, where degree of Happiness is measured using the mean response to a question about Happiness and disparity is expressed as the standard deviation of responses. These measures are married together in an index called the “inequality-adjusted Happiness” (IAH) that gives equal weight to either criterion. It is a linear combination of the mean Happiness value and the standard deviation in a nation, and it is expressed as a number on a 0-100 scale.
-
GREATER Happiness FOR A GREATER NUMBER Is that possible? If so, how?
Designing Positive Psychology, 2011Co-Authors: Ruut VeenhovenAbstract:INTRODUCTION Positive psychology is the scientific study of optimal human functioning (Sheldon et. all. 2000). Happiness is not the same as optimal functioning but is a closely related phenomenon. Happiness is a major manifestation of optimal functioning, since we are hard-wired to feel good when functioning well (e.g. Balcombe 2006). Happiness is also a determinant of optimal functioning, since Happiness “broadens” our behavioral repertoire and “builds” resources (Fredrickson 2004). Consequently, Happiness is a major topic in positive psychology. Much research in positive psychology aims at understanding why some people are happier than others and tries to find ways for making people happier. As such, the science of positive psychology links up with the ideology that we should foster human Happiness. The idea of a moral obligation to advance human Happiness is a fruit of the European “Enlightenment,” an intellectual movement that took position against religious views that had dominated thinking in the Middle Ages. One of the contested views was that Happiness can be found only in the afterlife and that earthly life serves as an entrance test to Heaven. Enlightened opinion was rather that Happiness is possible on Earth and that we should not renounce it. Another contested view was that the basis of morality is in divine revelation, and in particular in the 10 Commandments. Enlightened thinkers came to see morality more as a matter of human agreement and discussed the intellectual foundations for social contracts. Much of this thought was voiced by Jeremy Bentham (1789) in his famous book On Morals and Legislation, in which he argued that the good and bad of actions should be judged by their effects on human Happiness. In this view, the best thing to do is what results in the “Greatest Happiness, for the Greatest number.” This moral creed is called “the Greatest Happiness principle.”
Frederick Rosen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Classical Utilitarianism from Hume to Mill
2003Co-Authors: Frederick RosenAbstract:1. Introduction Part I 2. Utility and Justice: Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition 3. Reading Hume Backwards: Utility as the Foundation of Morals 4. The Idea of Utility in Smith's The Theory of Moral Sentiments 5. Helvetius, the Scottish Enlightenment, and Bentham's Idea of Utility 6. The Idea of Utility in Smith's Wealth of Nations 7. Bentham and Smith on Liberty 8. William Paley as a Utilitarian 9. Liberty, Utility, and the Reform of the Criminal Law 10. J.S. Mill's Hedonism 11. J.S. Mill on Justice and Liberty Part II 12. Punishment of the Innocent 13. Individual Sacrifice and the Greatest Happiness 14. The Tyranny of the Majority 15. Negative Liberty
-
Individual Sacrifice and the Greatest Happiness: Bentham on Utility and Rights
Utilitas, 1998Co-Authors: Frederick RosenAbstract:This article considers Bentham's response to the criticism of utilitarianism that it allows for and may even require the sacrifice of some members of society in order to increase overall Happiness. It begins with the contrast between the principle of utility and the contrasting principle of sympathy and antipathy to show that Bentham regarded the main achievement of his principle as overcoming the subjectivity he found in all other philosophical theories. This subjectivism, especially prevalent in theories of rights, might well lead to the sacrifice of the individual. The principle of utility was presented as an ‘objective’ theory that avoided the difficulties of other moral and political theories. The article also considers the importance of universally applicable ends, such as security and equality, as part of the principle of utility, and especially Bentham's view of maximizing pleasure as being a distributive rather than an aggregative idea. The article concludes by criticizing H. L. A. Hart's interpretation of the role of equality and rights in Bentham and John Stuart Mill, and argues that Mill's doctrine of moral rights builds on foundations originally established by Bentham, foundations which would preclude the sacrifice of individuals.
Joachim Hruschka - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the Greatest Happiness principle and other early german anticipations of utilitarian theory
Utilitas, 1991Co-Authors: Joachim HruschkaAbstract:Bentham was once thought to be the father of the principle which he called ‘the Greatest Happiness principle’. Now Hutcheson with his ‘Greatest Happiness for the Greatest numbers’ is the generally accepted source of this test of moral behaviour. It is not in Britain, however, but in Germany that one finds its origin. A quarter of a century before Hutcheson's An Inquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue (1725), a German philosopher provided a formulation of the principle on which Hutcheson relied.
Manuel Santos-redondo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Bentham and Owen on entrepreneurship and social reform
The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 2012Co-Authors: Estrella Trincado, Manuel Santos-redondoAbstract:Abstract Jeremy Bentham invested an important amount of money in New Lanark's cotton mills, which at that time were run by Robert Owen. However, apparently Bentham never took a serious interest in the organisation of such a successful entrepreneurship and new model society, although it seemed to fit in with Bentham's ideas of the entrepreneur (‘projector’) and also with Bentham's ideas on social reform, seeking the Greatest Happiness of the Greatest number. This article explains how Bentham's share in New Lanark came about. It tries to ascertain whether the New Lanark experiment and Owen's ideas fit Bentham's managerial theory and ideas on social reform so as to understand why Bentham did not pay more attention to Robert Owen's practice.
