著者

Kim Chaeyeong

雑誌

人文 (ISSN:18817920)

巻号頁・発行日

no.17, pp.45-61, 2019-03

---

社会全体の幸福の最大化を目指す理論として一般に理解される功利主義は、諸個人の権利を充分に考慮しないという批判にしばしば晒されてきた。ミルは著作『功利主義』において、権利が功利性の原理により導き出されることを示す試みを行っているが、批判者は、功利性の原理が社会全体の利益(幸福)の総和という観点を採用している以上、そこにおいて諸個人の利益、延いては権利を尊重することは出来ないと指摘する。この論文の目的は、個人の権利の土台が一般的功利にあることを示すことにより、その権利を功利主義の中に取り込むことが出来ることを明らかにすることである。そのために、まず権利概念がミルの功利主義においてどのように位置づけられているかを検討し、次にハートやベンサム、ラズの議論の考察を通じて、諸個人の権利が利益の総和でも個人の利益でもなく、社会の全成員によって共有される共通利益としての一般的功利により基礎づけられることを示すことを試みる。|Utilitarianism, formulated in a clear manner by Jeremy Bentham, has been confronted with numerous criticisms, especially those concerning its disregard for individual rights. In his work Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill attempted to place the idea of rights within the framework of his own version of utilitarianism. However, critics have continued to claim that the theory cannot consider the rights of separate individuals because its aim is to promote the aggregate of the interests of all parties in a society. In this paper I would like to show that there is a possibility of accommodating rights in Mill's utilitarianism. To achieve this goal, I will first have a careful look at the ideas of justice, rights, and utility in Utilitarianism, and clarify their mutual relations. Secondly, I will discuss Hart's criticism, and argue that Mill indeed failed to justify individual rights by "general utility," insofar as he understood it as the aggregate of the interests or happiness of all. Thirdly and finally, I will explore the foundation of rights by taking up the views of Bentham, Mill and Raz. In particular, I will link Raz's idea of the common good with Mill's notion of "general utility," and argue that "general utility," properly understood as the common interest shared by all members of a society, is, in Mill's considered opinion, the real foundation of rights.