IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/utilit/v26y2014i04p346-366_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On The Ambiguous Status of Pleasure in Bentham's Theory of Fictions

Author

Listed:
  • CLÉRO, JEAN-PIERRE

Abstract

If pleasure is more open than pain to a double definition, first as a real sensation, second as a more indirect impression, it is clear that the calculus – the advantages of which Bentham praised so fulsomely − cannot be identical for pleasure and pain alike. Sensations may be combined in the infinitesimal calculus in a substantive way, but this is impossible for the more indirect reflective impressions, which require other sorts of mathematics. For Bentham, it is not a question of eschewing calculation, but of facilitating it, perhaps through a probability calculus in a Bayesian or subjective style. The theory of fictions permits the combination or substitution of the two aspects of pleasure, so that what seems to be an ambiguity in Bentham's approach to pleasure is really an attempt to render the concept useful, that is, capable of utilization in calculations bearing on important areas of practical policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Clã‰Ro, Jean-Pierre, 2014. "On The Ambiguous Status of Pleasure in Bentham's Theory of Fictions," Utilitas, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(4), pages 346-366, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:utilit:v:26:y:2014:i:04:p:346-366_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0953820814000156/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:utilit:v:26:y:2014:i:04:p:346-366_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/uti .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.