A Christian Evaluation of Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism is an ethical theory developed by Jeremy Bentham and his protegee, John Stuart Mill. Ethical theories deal with the reasons which justify moral rules, and for Bentham and Mill, the moral worth of an action could be determined by how much happiness or pleasure it produced. The roots of utilitarianism can be seen, therefore, in ancient hedonistic philosophy, as developed by Democritus and Epicurus. Democritus identified the supreme goal of life as "contentment'. Epicurus believed that the goal of life was to attain a state of tranquility and freedom from fear and pain, though he advocated a simple life of abstaining from bodily desires, which gives quite a different flavour to hedonistic views.

Utilitarianism, like hedonism, bases itself around the contrasting experiences of pain and pleasure, and puts these at the centre of human experience. The moral worth of an action should be judged, according to Bentham, by the 'greatest happiness principle'- whatever brings the greatest good to the greatest number of people is the morally right action to take in any given situation. Bentham wrote that mankind is 'under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure', though Mill made some distinction between higher and lower pleasures: 'better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.'

There is no doubt that utilitarianism remains one of the most influential ethical theories affecting society today- one could argue that most democracies are based around utilitarian principles. As a major ethical theory, utilitarianism has been criticised and evaluated by many different philosophers and ethical writers, both secular and Christian. One of the major criticisms of the theory lies in the fact that it is teleological- based on the consequences of an action, which are in the future and impossible to predict with certainty. GE Moore argues that it falls into the naturalistic fallacy, because the theory assumes that goodness and pleasure are the same thing. This is not always the case. Finally, Ayn Rand points out the danger of utilitarian followers making ethical decisions based on nothing but 'emotional whims'- hardly a desirable ethical standpoint.

But in order to make a Christian evaluation of this theory, we must firstly take its guiding principles and compare them to God's values as articulated in Scripture. Logical criticisms of a theory have their place, but as Christians we are not simply concerned with whether utilitarianism is logically flawed or not. At its core, utilitarianism expresses that man is chiefly concerned with a desire for pleasure, and that pleasure is the nature of goodness. This is far more reflective of the Bible's definition of sin, than it is of the Bible's definition of man's true purpose and what goodness is.

If we examine Genesis 1, we notice that 'good' is a key word, repeated throughout the poetic pattern of the narrative: 'And God saw that it was good.' What does the word 'good' mean in this context? How does the Bible define it? The central teaching of Genesis 1 and 2 is that God creates the universe with a clear order and purpose. God rules over His creation -after all, He spoke it into being with just words- and places man on the earth to 'Rule over... every living creature' (1:28). The universe is in absolute harmony. Therefore 'good' is associated in the Bible with the person of God Himself -His creation is good because He is good- and with every being in its rightful place, under God. God gives Adam and Eve a rule (not to eat from the tree of knowledge), so from this we see that a truly happy state is not one without rules and without God. Adam and Eve live in paradise because they live under God's rule. The final verse of chapter 2 -'The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame'- emphasises their 'goodness' and happiness. They have nothing to be ashamed of.

The 'goodness' of God's creation quickly comes under threat. In Genesis 3, the serpent tempts Eve to doubt God's words. He tells her she will 'not surely die' from eating the forbidden fruit, and tells her that she will be 'like God, knowing good and evil', if she takes it. Again the word 'good' becomes very prominent. The knowledge of 'good and evil' is desirable for Eve, and she sees that the fruit 'was good for food'. The narrative deliberately uses this key word to emphasise the deception that Eve falls under. The fruit is not 'good'- as soon as they eat it, they experience shame, and quickly work to cover their nakedness. They hide from God, and they are punished for their disobedience. The whole of creation is fractured and fallen because of the fall of man: 'Cursed is the ground because of you' (3:17).

According to these first chapters of Genesis, man's desire for pleasure and to set his own moral rules is at the very heart of sin and our fallen nature. Eve listened to her appetite, not to God's word. Eve and Adam rejected God's rule and decided they wanted to make up their own rules, and know about good and evil for themselves. However, they discovered that only God can define what is good and what is evil. They instinctively knew that their disobedience was evil- why else would they have hidden from the One who created them? In trying to assert that taking the fruit was good, they only discovered that it was sin. They couldn't go against God's definition of good and evil.

Utilitarianism has a worrying correlation to this story of Eden. In creating the 'greatest happiness principle', not only does the theory pander to man's inherent selfishness and desire for pleasure, but it gives man an authority which is not rightfully his: to determine the morality of an action. An action is good if God says it is, and if God says it is not good, no amount of logical argument or ethical theorizing by man will change this. This is portrayed clearly throughout Genesis- after Adam and Eve's attempt to set their own rules, Cain murders his brother Abel and discovers he cannot get away with this. Men begin to increase in number and in sexual immorality, pursuing pleasure, and God judges them with the flood. Men decide to build a tower for their own glory, and God scatters them all over the earth. There is a pattern of man's rebellion, and God's judgement upon them, but there is always a note of God's mercy or grace too. God saves Noah and his family, and God chooses Abram to make a covenant with him and his descendants forever.

By Genesis 6, the Bible clearly establishes the fallen nature of man: 'every inclination of the thoughts of [man's] heart was only evil all the time' (6:5). This fallen nature, this total depravity, renders us unable to discern what is good, and equally unable to actually do what is good. Jesus described it as slavery to sin: 'everyone who sins is a slave to sin... if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.' (John 8:34-36) He also taught that 'out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit' (Mk 7:21). Paul continues this teaching in Romans 1, establishing that since the creation of the world, God's power is clearly displayed, and men are without excuse when they exchange the truth of God for a lie, and worship created things rather than the Creator (v 25). The picture is clear: men know there is a God, but they don't want to acknowledge Him. They want to live life their own way. But this brings God's judgement upon them. Utilitarianism simply doesn't acknowledge man's inability to keep to his own moral standards, let alone man's accountability to God for his actions on earth.

Scripture is God's revelation of Himself to man. In His grace, God revealed Himself and His will to man over the years- because we would never have known what is 'good' otherwise. The covenant with Moses and the Law at Sinai clearly show a God who makes His will known to the people, but the people are unable to keep His commandments. Even after receiving the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone, Moses comes down the mountain to witness the people worshipping a golden calf. The whole of the Old Testament, and its story of Israel's exile and return, leaves us in no doubt as to the fallenness of mankind and our inability to obey God's laws.

The Bible teaches, then, that we need God to reveal what is good to us, and even then we do not have power within ourselves to obey. This is why Jesus Christ was sent into the world. He was the only man to never sin, to never break God's word, and He died as a sacrifice to make atonement for our sins ('by His wounds we are healed' Isa 53).

The Bible teaches that God has man's best interests at heart. The whole story of God's salvation plan clearly illustrates that He is a God of compassion, slow to anger and rich in love (Ps 103). But it is in eternity, in the new heavens and the new earth, that we will experience a life with no suffering (Rev 21). On earth, we have no right to expect a life free from pain and suffering, because of the model of Christ. Peter calls Christians to embrace suffering for doing good (note that what is good is certainly not equatable with what is pleasurable), because 'To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.' (1 Pet 2:21) The Biblical view of life on earth is not that we should seek pleasure and avoid pain, but that we should imitate Christ. Christ's death on the cross, followed by His resurrection glory, provide a pattern for our own lives: we will suffer, die, and then be raised at the resurrection for an eternity of bliss.

Jesus made it clear to His followers that the world would reject them (John 17). If you seek to follow God's way of life, you will be persecuted (2 Tim 3:12). But the glory of eternity that awaits us make our suffering on earth worth while (1 Pet 1). Whilst on earth, we must seek to obey the clear commands of God in Scripture (a prescriptive approach to making ethical decisions), whilst also seeking personal guidance from God through prayer and the Holy Spirit, particularly for choices which Scripture does not make clear for us (a relational approach). As William Paley wrote: 'Whoever expects to find in the Scriptures a specific direction for every moral doubt that arises, looks for more than he will meet with.' However, the answer is not to form a Christian version of utilitarianism, as Paley did in 'Moral and Political Philosophy' (1785). Although there is some truth in his identifying a motive of 'the expectation of being after this rewarded... or punished', the danger is that this leads to man trying to win God's favour and earn his own salvation by his own works of 'goodness'. We must trust that our righteousness comes from Christ, not ourselves ('He made Him who had no sin to be sin for us, that in Him we might become the righteousness of God' 2 Cor 5:21). Then in response to God's grace and salvation, we should seek to live our lives for His glory, not our own, to 'make our calling and election sure' (2 Pet 1).