I will begin the essay by outlining the main elements of the utilitarian doctrine or theory?
(fact) as described by Jeremy Bentham and consider how Dickens critiques the hedonic
calculus and associated ideas of this approach. I will draw upon later examples of this critique
that seems to be refined and explored by Nietzsche, Marx and others.
Bentham’s philosophy of the “utility” draws on three important facets of human thought.
First, he relies on empiricist epistemology. This means that the knowledge gained must
derive itself from real and factual experience, rather than hypothetical situations posited by
proponents of “Natural Law”. Although Mill and Bentham thought that it would be possible to derive
a law of human morality rather like a natural law as opposed to a priori knowledge. Secondly, he
relies on materialist metaphysics, meaning heconsiders only what really exists in the material world and can
be measured to beimportant when considering our surroundings. Finally, he relies on a science of meaning.
This pertains to the end result of actions, rather than focusing on their preconceived ntentions.
Therefore, this leads to what many call a “hard facts” style of philosophy where the
ends justify the means. This is often called consequentialist, meaning that an action should be
judged based on its result, not its intention.
Consequently there must be some measurement of good and bad according to Bentham .This
attempt to establish a fact led to him drawing up his Hedonic Calculus to measure pleasure
and pain. This is the essence of the utilitarian fact or at least this is how we are supposed to measure pleasure and pain.
- Intensity - how deep it the pleasure or pain?
- Duration - how long will the pleasure or pain last?
- Certainly - is the pleasure or pain certain or uncertain?
- Propinquity - is the pleasure/pain near or far away?
- Fecundity - is it going to be followed up by sensations of the same kind?
- Purity - is it pure/pleasure or is it going to be tinted by the opposites?
- Extent - the number of persons it extends to Bentham (p89 1789 ) (1)
Gradgrind is presented as, “a man of facts and calculations” Dickens (1995 pg 6) (1). Dickens
goes on to personify him as “a man who proceeds upon the principle that two and two are
four, and nothing over, and who is not to be talked into for allowing for anything over”
Dickens , (1995p 6)(2). Through such declarations, Dickens makes it evident that Gradgrind
emphasizes only that which comes from pure fact. Additionally, Gradgrind feels anything
not in total compliance with factual evidence to be the product of frivolity and fancy, to him,
two most loathsome evils. In his opinion, emotions and imagination are weaknesses, wholly
unnecessary in civilized society. The main reason perhaps for utilitarians liking facts is
that they are measurable and calculation is necessary for finding out the way to bring
about the greatest happiness.
Dickens continues to explain Gradgrind’s philosophy. He states that Gradgrind has, “a rule
and a pair of scales, and the multiplication table always in his pocket, [sir,] ready to weigh
and measure any parcel of human nature, and tell you exactly what it comes to” ( Dickens p
6). By Gradgrind’s theory, an individual is not a creature of unique worth, but a being of
summative data, whose value may be ascertained by tabulating his usefulness and production
in society . Gradgrind echoes the character of Hooper in Evelyn Waugh`s
Brideshead Revisited, “They could not get away with it in business” Waugh (p7 1952) (1)
Furthermore, Gradgrind feels that all aspects of life are simply input for a universal
Calculation. As the novel progresses, it becomes apparent that Gradgrind’s inflexible
obsession with facts is meant by Dickens to be indicative of the industrialism of the
nineteenth century.
In the schoolroom scene, Sissy starts to show how the Gradgrind system only relies on fact.
As Dickens describes the schoolroom, we see the following contrast: “But, whereas the girl
was so dark-eyed and dark-haired, that she seemed to received a deeper and more lustrous
colour from the sun when it shone upon her, the boy was so light-eyed and light-haired that
the self-same rays appeared to draw out of him what little colour he ever possessed” Dickens
( 1995 p 7) (3)There is a real sense here of Dickens seeing this reductionist approach as a
major error in Utilitarian philosophy.
This initial description accentuates Gradgrind’s reductionism. From the onset of the novel, he
is characterized to be devoid of feelings; this is directly attributable to his denial of fancy.
Dickens stresses this dehumanization of industrialisation as a result and is illustrated by his
description of Coketown Dickens (1995 p 18) (4) By delineating his character as such so
early in the novel, Dickens makes it apparent that these aspects of Gradgrind will play an
essential role in his critique of utilitarianism.
The circus people could be called the polar opposite of utilitarianism. They are open-minded
human beings whose goal in life is to make people happy as a contrast to the methods of
Gradgrind. Bounderby and other utilitarian’s represent that which cannot be measured in
utilitarianism such as love, imagination, and humour as immeasurable. . When Sissy Jupe
was taken in by the Gradgrinds to live in their home she is portrayed as a representative of the
circus people with her innocence and free-will, qualities which are lacking in the lives of the
Gradgrinds. Dickens is saying by this contrast----that people with imaginations are
happier
Even after numerous attempts to force utilitarianism onto her by Mr. Gradgrind and his
school, she is still the girl that who values fancy she influences these qualities on to the
youngest Gradgrind daughter Jane.
Jane is not spoken of much until the end of the book but is used by Dickens to show the
effects of the utilitarian lifestyle as opposed to the non-utilitarian lifestyle. Ultimately the
utilitarians find themselves ultimately experiencing a crisis when facts do not deal with the
uncertainty of existence.
Without the utilitarian fact Dickens shows the circus people able to live their lives happily
and freely, able to love, laugh, and use their imagination and free from hedonic calculus.
The factual basis of Gradgrind is further emphasized as different when Sissy is addressed
only as “‘Girl number twenty’” Dickens ( 1995 p6 ) ( 5) by Gradgrind. A name shows
individuality and is an expression of creativity. However, this is ultimately shunned in
Gradgrind’s system. Similarities can be seen in Huxley’s “Brave New World” and Orwell’s
“1984.” Dickens like Orwell and Huxley indicate that moral actions stem from real human
qualities and shows that being utilitarian takes away the ability to be fully human . The
ability to shorten and change a name is therefore an essential element in maintaining
individuality .
F.R. Leavis explains how being addressed as a number gives preciseness and fact to a person:
“Sissy’s incapacity to acquire this kind of ‘fact’ of formula, her inaptness for education, is
manifested to us, on the other hand, as part and parcel of her sovereign and indefeasible
humanity: it is the virtue that makes it impossible for her to understand, or acquiesce in, an
ethos for which she is ‘girl number twenty’, or to think of any other human being as a unit for
arithmetic.” Leavis( 1970 p 367) (1)
Arithmetic is an exact science and one by which Gradgrind abides by and uses as
identification. Another scene in which Sissy’s compassion, positive outlook, and
individuality go against Gradgrind’s system is when her father abandons her. Despite the
circumstances in how her father left, she never gives into the thought that her father is
leaving for his own reasons but rather to make life better for her. This is seen when she states:
‘O my dear father, my good kind father, where are you gone? You are gone to try to do me
some good, I know! You are gone away for my sake, I am sure. And how miserable and
helpless you will be without me, poor, poor father, until you come back!’ Dickens ( 1995 p 32) (6)
Gradgrind can’t believe that Sissy thinks he is doing this for her. According to the Gradgrind
system, Sissy isn’t basing her conclusion of why her father left on fact; it is being based on
wishful thinking and fancy “as well as compassion. It is only natural of Sissy to believe that
her father is doing what is best for her.
Gradgrind’s system is shown by Dickens to be anything but natural and does not make sense
to Sissy because it goes against the natural grain of her upbringing of individuality and fancy.
In fact, it is unnatural for Sissy to be subjected to a single factual way of thinking and
viewing of the world as the Gradgrind system would insist. Dickens clearly indicates that
calculation of moral laws is not the same as the natural laws of science. Yes values cannot
be calculated like this. Gradgrind is clearly not in possession of the facts because he cannot
predict Sissy`s response to her father’s departure . Or is it his lack of imagination?
As Sissy moves on with her life and moves in with Gradgrind and his family, it is seen that
the Gradgrind system is faultier than ever. Dickens shows an ever widening of divergence
between utilitarian thinking and awareness in the contradictions within it. Even though her
free thoughts and ideas of fancy are suppressed, she still shows vigour and life and this is
seen when the Dickens states that, “Sissy, with her dark eyes wonderingly directed to
Louisa’s face, was uncertain whether to say more or to remain silent” Dickens (1995 p7) (7).
Another piece of evidence that shows that Sissy still maintains her creative way
of thinking is stated when she brings up the question of National Prosperity posed in class by
Mr. M’Choackumchild:
I said I didn’t know. I thought I couldn’t know whether it was a prosperous nation or not, and whether I was in a thriving state or not, unless I knew who had got the money, and whether or not it was mine. But that had nothing to do with it. It was not in the figures at all.
( Dickens p 47)(8)
Quotes of more than 3 lines go in hanging indents without inverted commas.
I will conclude by showing the relevance of Dickens critique of Utilitarian facts by outlining
later philosophers who refined and added to his criticisms. Nietzsche`s ( 1997 p 98 ) (1) main
argument against Utilitarianism is that it fails to notice that in taking their own version of
good and happiness to be true and fails to understand that it is necessary to examine a
comparative study of morality considering issues that are studied and those which are
ignored. (Nietzsche 1997 p98)(1)) Dickens would argue that fancy makes possible an
awareness of the above distinction Then I feel that good and pleasure are not always the
same. G E Moore calls this a naturalistic fallacy, (cited in Gareth Southwell ` 2008 p 150)
This supports the argument that facts are historically constructed and are seen as
belonging to particular societal form.
Marx argues, cited in Allan (1973 p 189 )(1) that Bentham fails to take account of the
changing character of people, and hence the changing character of what is good for them.
This criticism is especially important for Marx, because he believed that all important
statements were contingent upon particular historical conditions. Marx argues that human
nature is dynamic, so the concept of a single utility for all humans is one-dimensional and not
useful. When he decries Bentham's application of the 'yard measure' Allan( 1973 p189) (2) of
now to 'the past, present and future' Allan ( 1973 p189) (3), he decries the implication that
society, and people, have always been, and will always be, as they are now. The above are
similar view to Dickens that the practicality of utilitarianism is flawed and that self interest
itself varies according to the particular society and particular consciousness. I believe it
shows that self interest varies and therefore cannot be measured. True
Nicolas Coles ( 1986 p 153)(1) points out that Dickens' critique was :
"against statistics as a form of social knowledge, a way of knowing which necessarily
constitutes the object of its knowledge—in this case the working class and their conditions
of life—in particular ways and which thereby dictates particular approaches to it. It is
statistics which Foucault would call “ a disciplinary technology of knowledge, as a
mechanism for moral and political surveillance and restraint. (cited Coles p153)(2))
References
(1) Derek P H Allan The Utilitarianism 0f Marx and Engels American Philosophical Quarterly vol 10,No 3 July1973
(2) Derek P H Allan The Utilitarianism 0f Marx and Engels American Philosphical Quarterly vol 10,No 3 July1973
(3) Derek P H Allan The Utilitarianism 0f Marx and Engels American Philosphical Quarterly vol 10,No 3 July1973
(1)Jeremy Bentham Value of a lot of pleasure and pain chapter xv ( Course Handout)
(1)Coles, Nicholas. "The Politics of Hard Times : Dickens the Novelist versus Dickens the Reformer." Dickens Studies Annual, 15 (1986)
(2) Coles, Nicholas. "The Politics of Hard Times : Dickens the Novelist versus Dickens the Reformer." Dickens Studies Annual, 15 (1986)
(1)Charles Dickens Hard Times Wordsworth edition 1995
(2)Charles Dickens Hard Times Wordsworth edition 1995
(3)Charles Dickens Hard Times Wordsworth edition 1995
(4)Charles Dickens Hard Times Wordsworth edition 1995
(5)Charles Dickens Hard Times Wordsworth edition 1995
(6)Charles Dickens Hard Times Wordsworth edition 1995
(7)Charles Dickens Hard Times Wordsworth edition 1995
(8)Charles Dickens Hard Times Wordsworth edition 1995
(1)Leavis, F. R. (1970). The Great Tradition. Chatto and Windus 1970)
(1) Nietzsche,F. Beyond Good and Evil Dover Publications 1997
(1) Southwell, Garath A begginers guide to Nietzsche’s beyond good and evil Wiley Blackwell 2009
Bibliography
Allan Derek P H The Utilitarianism 0f Marx and Engels American Philosphical Quarterly
Bentham, Jeremy Value of a lot of pleasure and pain chapter xv ( Course Handout) vol 10,No 3 July1973
Coles, Nicholas. "The Politics of Hard Times : Dickens the Novelist versus Dickens the reformer. Dickens Studies Annual, 15 (1986)
Leavis, F. R. The Great Tradition. Chatto and Windus. (1970).
Southwell, Garath A begginers guide to Nietzsche’s beyond good and evil Wiley Blackwell 2009
Nietzsche,F. Beyond Good and Evil Dover Publications 1997
No comments:
Post a Comment