Lecture 5: Classical Utilitarianism and Distributive Justice

What this lecture covers

Continuing from the previous lecture, Shapiro digs into how classical utilitarianism handles the measurement and distribution of utility. He shows that Bentham's system treats utility as quantifiable, expressible in money, and comparable across people, and then works through the principle of diminishing marginal utility, the idea that each additional unit of a good delivers less new satisfaction than the last.

The lecture's central move is to show that these assumptions combine to make classical utilitarianism a radically redistributive doctrine: taken to its logical conclusion, it implies redistributing wealth until everyone has equal utility. Shapiro then explains how Bentham tries to limit that implication with a distinction between "absolute" and "practical" equality, and closes by questioning whether individual rights have any place in a doctrine this consequentialist.

Key ideas

• Interpersonal comparisons of utility: Bentham's system assumes we can compare and add up utility across different people, a controversial assumption other traditions later reject.
• Diminishing marginal utility: each additional unit of a good (money, a car, a loaf of bread) produces less additional satisfaction than the previous unit, though richer people still want more, not less, money.
• Redistribution to the poor: because a dollar means more to someone poor than to someone rich, utilitarian logic favors taking from the rich and giving to the poor until utility is equalized.
• Absolute versus practical equality: Bentham resists redistributing all the way to equality, arguing the rich would "burn their crops" (destroy incentives) before giving everything away, so redistribution should stop at a lower, "practical" point.
• Empirical uncertainty: how far redistribution can go before undermining incentives is an empirical question without a clear scientific answer, which weakens the claim that utilitarianism gives certain, science-based political answers.
• Rights entering through the back door: Bentham's view that law "preserves" what labor creates suggests utilitarianism still needs to respect some individual entitlement to the fruits of one's work, even though it has no explicit theory of rights.

Walkthrough

The mechanics of measuring utility (0:00)

Shapiro recaps Bentham's principle of maximizing the greatest happiness of the greatest number and explains that Bentham treats utility as quantifiable and expressible through money, illustrated with an example of paying students to attend class. He introduces the idea of revealed preference: varying a price can reveal information about people's preferences without changing those preferences.

Diminishing marginal utility and its complications (5:57)

Working through student examples (shoes, beer, integrity, health), the class tests the principle of diminishing marginal utility. Shapiro clarifies a common misunderstanding: diminishing marginal utility does not mean rich people care less about money; it means they need more of it to gain the same increment of satisfaction, so utilitarian logic expects the rich to remain greedy for wealth rather than indifferent to it.

Redistribution and the limits of utilitarianism (25:57)

Using an example comparing a wealthy person and someone destitute, Shapiro shows that Bentham's logic implies transferring wealth from rich to poor until utility is equalized, which made classical utilitarianism seem dangerously radical to property owners. Bentham's own response was to distinguish "absolute" equality (full redistribution) from "practical" equality (redistribution up to the point where incentives to produce start breaking down), an empirical claim that Shapiro compares to modern debates over tax cuts and economic stimulus.

What about rights? (34:15)

Shapiro asks whether a doctrine this focused on aggregate utility leaves any room for individual rights, noting that Bentham's framework seems to permit outcomes like ethnic cleansing if it increases total utility. He points to Bentham's claim that law "preserves" the fruits of labor as an implicit, if underdeveloped, recognition that individuals need some protected claim to what they produce, previewing the "rights-utility synthesis" that the course will examine through John Stuart Mill.

Before you watch

• Review Lecture 4 on Bentham's five features of classical utilitarianism, especially the claims that utility is quantifiable and comparable across people.
• Basic familiarity with the idea of diminishing returns (from an introductory economics course, if you have taken one) is useful but not required.

Check your understanding

1. Why does the principle of diminishing marginal utility push classical utilitarianism toward radical redistribution?
2. Explain why diminishing marginal utility does not imply that rich people care less about money.
3. What is Bentham's distinction between absolute and practical equality, and why is it an empirical rather than a scientific claim?
4. How does Bentham's remark that law "preserves" the fruits of labor suggest a limited role for individual rights within utilitarianism?