Talk:Jeremy Bentham
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of the Philosophy WikiProject, an attempt at creating a standardised, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use Philosophy resource. Please read the instructions and standards for writing and maintaining philosophy articles. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
Runcorn 19:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Theory of Fictions
I greatly miss so far the discussion of Bentham and mention of his Theory of Fictions. The following quote is the opening passage of Benthan & Vaihinger compiled and edited by Frederick Mann.
``Jeremy Bentham formulated his very important "Theory of Fictions," which was compiled and edited into the book Bentham's Theory of Fictions by C. K. Ogden.`` -- http://www.buildfreedom.com/language/bentham.html
--KYPark 14:49, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I agree that there should be explicit discussion on Bentham's theory of fictions. See in this regard particularly Ross Harrison's book "Bentham". Dsp13 11:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Mr. Ripley
User:Baddog added the following description from 'Ripley's Believe It or Not';
- Ripley's Believe It or Not Wonder Book of Strange Facts (1957) states the following on page 33: "It was in accordance with this last weird flare of his genius that his testament demanded that his head be severed from his body in the presence of his friends and placed in a separate glass case which now rests between his ankles, while a mask, a life-like replica of his living face, be placed upon his shoulders instead." As for the rest of his body, only the skeleton was preserved.
Which is fine, but unfortunately I'm not sure Mr. Ripley knew what he was talking about. Ripley seems to be describing the AutoIcon as he saw it in the 50s, not what was said in Bentham's will. The article already contains a good link to extracts from Bentham's will, which says;
- ...the bones are to be formed into a skeleton which after the head prepared in the manner already stated has been attached to it is to be dressed in the clothes usually worn by Mr Bentham & in this manner to be perpetually preserved.
Replacing the head with a wax replica (not a mask) was a solution of expedience after Bentham's death, as described in the article.
As such Ripley's description seems to be misinformation and I've removed it. -- Solipsist 8 July 2005 07:51 (UTC)
[edit] Pronouncing Bentham
I have only ever heard ['benθəm], never ['bentəm]. Presumably, ['bentəm] is historically correct, but any non-native speaker should surely be recommended to use ['benθəm] to reflect current usage? --stochata 09:32, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Since there have been no replies, and since the OED recommends the pronunciation of Benthamism as ['benθəˌmɪz(ə)m], I will change the entry to ['benθəm]. --stochata 22:08, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
- The article on Bentham in Nationalencyklopdien considers ['bentəm] to be the correct pronunciation and in the internet version there is even a native speaker pronunciation using this pronunciation. I re-added ['bentəm] as an alternate pronunciation.
- Peter Isotalo 13:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Panopticon
The article says it was never built, which I know many sources suggest, but see Millbank Prison, which Bentham designed. (Just created it as it was on Wikipedia:Nuttall Encyclopedia topics). Justinc 00:10, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
- I wonder whether the problem comes from the details of what really counts as a panopticon. I'm not really sure, but Bentham's design for the panopticon is a cylander with the cells arranged around the perimeter and observed from the centre. The description of Millbank Prison with its radially arranged corridors of cells, sounds similar to Pentonville (HM Prison) which is also often described as being based on the panopticon. However, they plausibly aren't really panopticons because they don't allow the central observer to see each cell individually. -- Solipsist 12:56, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
- Yes I wondered if it was a geometric thing, but I didnt have time to look at the drawings then. Also it is generally discussed as an idea rather than actually useful; all my references are about surveillence and art (Langlands & Bell etc). Just using the naked eye you couldnt make a very large prison like this. But as Bentham designed Millbank it is worth sorting out; I had some vague memory that Millbank wasnt in the literature quite by accident. But I have most of the reference material so will look Justinc 20:11, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
- I know what you mean - much modern discussion of the Panopticon is wrapped on with discussion of a surveilance society. Today you could presumably quite easily achieve Bentham's aim by placing a CCTV camera in each cell and build a prison with any geometry you liked - in fact there quite probably are prisons like this. In any case, as you say the Millbank prison connection is interesting and warrants investigation. -- Solipsist 20:38, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
- Yes I wondered if it was a geometric thing, but I didnt have time to look at the drawings then. Also it is generally discussed as an idea rather than actually useful; all my references are about surveillence and art (Langlands & Bell etc). Just using the naked eye you couldnt make a very large prison like this. But as Bentham designed Millbank it is worth sorting out; I had some vague memory that Millbank wasnt in the literature quite by accident. But I have most of the reference material so will look Justinc 20:11, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Animal rights
Bentham was not for animal rights but for animal welfare. As an utilitarian, he considered the happiness and suffering of animals important in the same way as that of men. He did not think that animals have some particular rights: if the animal is as happy in a big cage with stimulating contents, then it is morally acceptable to have that animal in that cage. A similar divide exists between current animal activists. Therefore, animal rights should again be replaced by animal welfare. -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.186.243.217 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 17 December 2005.
- I don't know the precise ins and outs, but this comment makes a lot of sense to me. On the other hand, Bentham does appear to have been adopted by the modern animal rights loby — the animal rights article currently cites him for example — so I would need to do a bit more checking before making a change. Note also that the animal rights article includes a quote suggesting that Benthan did think animals should have rights. -- Solipsist 17:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
- It is similar: compare the animal to a human, would Jeremy Bentham have been against putting a human child in a cage with stimulating contents (which would be more difficult to do considering the nature of humans, but still possible)?
-
- I am not sure of how he saw "rights" in general, but it is true that, to be more specific, he was not for animal rights as much as for welfare.
- --A Sunshade Lust 17:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- From the quotation given on the animal rights page, it sounds like "right" was used to mean "right to be protected by the law." He seems to advocate animal welfare more than animal rights--they can't become citizens, but they are entitled to similar benefits due to their ability to suffer, the same as a child or a mentally retarded adult. If someone else with more experience doesn't change it within a week or so, I'll try and do it myself.
- --Therealhazel 04:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] First radical?
"Bentham is the first and perhaps the greatest of the "philosophical radicals""
I disagree with this. George Berkeley came before Bentham, and most would agree that Berkeley was radical as hell. Am I just misunderstanding the sentence? Haddock420 19:23, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Auto-Icon
"As requested in his will, his body was preserved and stored in a wooden cabinet, termed his "Auto-Icon," at University College London. It has occasionally been brought out of storage at official functions so that his eccentric presence can live on."
This gives the impression that it is normally stowed away. In fact, the case containing the auto-icon is in an accessible part of the entrance lobby of University College. The heavy doors shown in the picture are normally open during the day, and the case is accompanied by a small exhibition.
[edit] Not an atheist
I have removed the "Atheist philosophers" tag, per the following reference:
- Bentham has been called "an atheist" or even a "militant atheist", but David Berman in his History of Atheism in Britain (1988, p. 192) writes that "it seems to be accepted that Bentham nowhere explicitly denies the existence of God, or describes himself as an atheist". [1] Runcorn 23:00, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Classical liberalism
I dispute that he was a classical liberal. Where do you see him advocating that the individual be protected from the will of the majority? He was a full out utilitarian. RJII 05:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I also dispute this. Read for example this article: http://stmarys.ca/~wmills/course203/5Liberalism.html. I consider him to be a reform liberal / social liberal.
mcduarte2000
- Bentham was a philosophical radical. Their ideas were influential on the Whigs who then introduced Malthusian Poor Law reforms putting the onus on the individual to work or perish, in a free trade reaction against Tory paternalistic charity which to Malthusians just encouraged the poor to breed, so at that time the philosophical radicals seem to have influenced economic liberalism. A coming together of more socially liberal Whigs and "popular radicals" then produced the Liberal Party (UK) which is essentially social liberal, and from what I've read it seem clear that Bentham's subsequent influence was on Social Liberalism rather than economic liberalism. The common usage of "Classical liberalism" to mean economic liberalism confuses this issue. ...dave souza, talk 10:04, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reversion of "Sex With Minors"
I read the Pederasty essay, trying to find Bentham's own definition of the word, and AFAICT, despite modern meaning of Pederasty as homosexual sex with minors his definition[2], which I quote:
"3. Of an object of the proper species but the wrong sex. This is distinguished from the rest by the name of paederasty. "
seems to me not to refer to minors at all. If someone knows better, please correct me. I am also researching his definition of 'usury'. Thanks, Crum375 16:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I added in the 'Defence of Usury' (DoU) reference, but I am not sure about just leaving in a direct usury link in the text as it can be misleading. Having read that DoU document, Bentham does seem to make a case for removing limits on interest rates, which is currently stated in the article. But today's modern definition of the word 'usury' is excessive or 'loan-shark'-type interest, associated with organized crime, etc. (The original definition of course was any interest at all.) I think all Bentham wanted to say (and I admit I did not fully read every word of his text) is that it is somewhat arbitrary to attach a negative connotation to a single threshold number - if you are below it you are OK, if you are above it you are immoral or a criminal. Using the word 'usury' alone in the text, even with the wiki-link, can be confusing to a reader who doesn't see the entire picture, IMO. But I am of course open to comments and critiques. Crum375 16:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Number of words produced
the number given is 5, 000, 0000
is this meant to be 5, 000, 000 or 50, 000, 000 - I intended the former and have changed it accordingly. Dsp13 15:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
