Bentham, Jeremy (1748–1832)

Author(s):  
Ross Harrison

Jeremy Bentham held that all human and political action could be analysed in terms of pleasure and pain, and so made comprehensible. One such analysis is how people actually do behave; according to Bentham, seeking pleasure and avoiding pain. Another such analysis is of how they ought to behave. For Bentham, this is that they should maximize utility, which for him is the same as producing the greatest happiness of the greatest number, which, again, is the same for him as maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. His chief study was planning how there could be a good system of government and law; that is, how laws could be created so that people being as they actually are (seeking their own pleasure) might nevertheless do what they ought (seek the greatest pleasure of all). The instruments which government use in this task are punishment and reward, inducing action by threats and offers. For Bentham, punishment is done not for the sake of the offender, but to deter other people from doing the same kind of thing. Hence on his theory it is the apparent punishment which does all the good, the real punishment which does all the harm. Bentham thought that the primary unit of significance was the sentence, not the word. He used this idea to produce profound analyses of the nature of law and legal terms, such as’ right’, ‘duty’ or ‘property’. These are what he calls names of fictions – terms which do not directly correspond to real entities. However, this does not mean that they are meaningless. Instead, meaning can be given to them by translating sentences in which they occur into sentences in which they do not occur. Thus legal rights are understood in terms of legal duties, because sentences involving the former can be understood in terms of sentences involving the latter; these in turn can be analysed in terms of threats of punishment or, again, pleasure and pain. This gives sense to legal rights, but sense cannot be given in the same way to natural rights. For Bentham, we have no natural rights and the rights that we do have, such as property rights, are created by government, whose chief task is to protect them. Bentham also worked out how people could be protected from government itself, designing an elaborate system of constitutional law in which representative democracy was a central element. Bentham invented the word ‘international’, and when he died he had an international legal and political influence. His chief influence in philosophy has been as the most important historical exponent of a pure form of utilitarianism.

Author(s):  
Frederic R. Kellogg

This paper approaches Bentham's ontology of rights from a viewpoint influenced by American philosophical pragmatism. I examine how rights are conceived and discussed in relation to the real. Jeremy Bentham maintained that all rights are "fictitious entities." But, in privileging "political" over moral and natural rights, Bentham implies that legal rights stand in a privileged position over natural rights with regard to the relation of mind to the actual. By reason of its enforceability through sanctions, a legal right for Bentham has a privileged connection to the real. I argue that nonlegal rights can be conceived as bearing a roughly parallel relation to the real in guiding human conduct by suasion rather than sanctions. Their relationship to "something real and observable" is their relation to voluntary conduct through belief. Bentham's ontology dictates a distinct legal and political system. Practically, it leaves the real existence of rights entirely in the hands of government officials, and the only choice of humans interested in securing rights lies in their enactment and enforcement in and through a legal regime.


Legal Theory ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
Ira K. Lindsay

ABSTRACT Two rival approaches to property rights dominate contemporary political philosophy: Lockean natural rights and egalitarian theories of distributive justice. This article defends a third approach, which can be traced to the work of David Hume. Unlike Lockean rights, Humean property rights are not grounded in pre-institutional moral entitlements. In contrast to the egalitarian approach, which begins with highly abstract principles of distributive justice, Humean theory starts with simple property conventions and shows how more complex institutions can be justified against a background of settled property rights. Property rights allow people to coordinate their use of scarce resources. For property rules to serve this function effectively, certain questions must be considered settled. Treating existing property entitlements as having prima facie validity facilitates cooperation between people who disagree about distributive justice. Lockean and egalitarian theories endorse moral claims that threaten to unsettle property conventions and undermine social cooperation.


Jewishness ◽  
2008 ◽  
pp. 133-150
Author(s):  
Joachim Schlör

This chapter evaluates the meaning of objects inventoried and packed as emigrants prepared to leave Germany for Palestine after Adolf Hitler came to power. Private property has, for both the individual memory and the collective memory, a deep emotional significance. The exclusion of the Jews from German society started with the National Socialist policy of ‘Aryanization’, the expropriation of property. Many y émigrés had to abandon, to leave behind, their private dwellings. In the process, they lost more than the object itself. Around 1800, the British philosopher and legal theoretician Jeremy Bentham drew attention to the importance of the relationship between an object and its owner: ownership forms the basis of a hope. Thus, the threat of losing property is symbolic of the loss of all hope of a continued life in Germany and as a German. Ultimately, Aryanization and confiscation were a symbolic theft of identity. And in these cases, even the legal system was no longer capable of protecting property rights. Those who emigrated in good time were able to take at least some of their property with them.


2020 ◽  
pp. 93-131
Author(s):  
Nigel Biggar

This chapter completes the testing of the Sceptical Tradition’s objections to natural rights, by examining the thought of a selection of contemporary thinkers, in addition to that of John Finnis (in Chapter 4). Those selected are Onora O’Neill (and in relation to her, John Tasioulas, Elizabeth Ashford, and Henry Shue), Nicholas Wolterstorff, and James Griffin (and in relation to him, Allen Buchanan). From this examination the conclusion is drawn that the arguments made by Shue, Tasioulas, Ashford, and Griffin fail to dislodge O’Neill’s ‘radical’ critique, namely, that where capable holders of feasible correspondent duties have not been identified, universal human rights are illusory. This implies that rights are contingent on the circumstances of feasibility and capability, and that there is no constant natural right. The chapter then proceeds to draw general conclusions from the testing of natural rights-talk in Chapters 2 to 5. One seminal conclusion is that the paradigm of a right is positively legal, commanding the support of such institutions as police and courts. This is what explains its distinctive authority vis-à-vis other claims. It follows that a natural right, existing apart from civil society and so lacking institutional support, is, at best, analogous to a proper, legal right. However, since the very concept of a right connotes the stability and security of a legal right, natural rights-talk misleads and is best avoided. Therefore, while there is natural right or law or morality, and while there are legal rights justified by natural morality, there are no natural rights.


2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 871-901
Author(s):  
Marco Brydolf-Horwitz

Landlords’ decisions significantly shape the housing outcomes of poor and stigmatized renters. Despite this important gatekeeping role, studies of antidiscrimination law have not thoroughly examined how private market actors respond to reform efforts or how private property rights potentially enable them to evade regulation. This study draws on ethnographic data gathered between late 2015 and early 2018 to examine how and why Seattle landlords opposed an ordinance regulating the use of criminal records in rental housing. The findings indicate that landlords’ opposition stems from their expectation that property protects owners’ ability to control their exposure to risk. Yet conceptions of property and risk perception alone cannot explain how landlords can evade regulation. Toward this end, I show how private property rights facilitate adaptation by which landlords can legally circumvent the intent of the law. The study highlights the value of a sociolegal framework of property in action, which incorporates cultural notions of ownership, legal rights, and the regulatory and market environments that shape owners’ discretion. I suggest that greater attention to risk discourse and property rights will deepen our understanding of the limits of antidiscrimination law and the ability of private market actors to adapt to, and resist, legal reform efforts.


1977 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 454-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward N. Muller

Theories of the behavioral consequences of political support coincide in the prediction that political support will correlate positively with indices of conventional behavior, negatively with indices of unconventional behavior. Survey data drawn from three communities in the Federal Republic of Germany show that an index of support for the structure of political authority is negatively correlated both with an index of actual participation in aggressive political behavior and with an index of participation in conventional electoral/pressure-group politics. Since the political behavior indices are themselves positively correlated, it is useful to construct a typology which differentiates between “pure” types – no participation, participation only in conventional, participation only in aggressive – and “mixed” types – participation in conventional and moderately aggressive, participation in conventional and highly aggressive. When the relationship between political support and the political-action type index is examined, it turns out that two of the types are associated with medium political support, while four of them occur at low support. To achieve more accurate explanation of types of political behavior, a model for prediction of each action type is proposed, taking into account interaction between political support, sense of personal political influence, and belief in the efficacy of past collective political aggression. The test of the model yields positive results, suggesting that it represents a fruitful beginning toward development of a theory of behavioral consequences of political support.


2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 157
Author(s):  
Sattar Zarkalam ◽  
Amin Rooholamini

In today’s world where the process of development and the industry is evolving more rapidly than expected, the legal notions are going forward on their compliance in line with these developments. The increasing development of intellectual property rights and their samples is an example of this change. One of the most important issues and instances of this tendency in legal rights is associated with fashion productions and creations. France, as one of the greatest leading country in fashion industry since long time ago, has legally protected the dress and beautiful creations in the intellectual property rules and in the different time periods, under the various titles, including the drawings and models rights, industrial property rights, literary and artistic property rights. French jurisprudence has broadly interpreted the concept of the fashion industry and consequently, the dress and beauty creations that have evolved not only the goods, but all parties involved in the production of the fashion industry. In Iranian law also, although there is no progress in this field compared to French law, with an optimistic interpretation of the rules of its intellectual property, it can be associated with Droit d'-auteur rules in addition to the industrial property rights under different titles such as design and drawings, Applied artwork, folklore etc.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Müller

China's rise undoubtedly changes the global distribution of power. But how does the People's Republic transform its growing claim to power into political action, and what effects can already be seen today in the Chinese neighbourhood? In this book, Chinese activities in Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Iran are empirically analyzed. At its core is the question of whether the growing trade exchange, the increase in Chinese investments and the intensification of military cooperation are accompanied by an increase in China's political influence in the countries of Central and South Asia. The book aims to enrich the international debate on China's expansion of power with empirical findings.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document