But what remains, from an objective historical point of view, is in vain, more significant. the father of English utilitarianism, for the direction under consideration, one can see, in addition to his radical, individualistically colored democratism, an attempt to transition from a rational explanation of the individual to a positive one, which, however, was not successful.
Let's see what amendments have been made to the resolution. problems of individualism by his compatriots who were dealing with the same problem.
The significance of Benthamism, in relation to what is being considered, can be characterized as an attempt to reduce the individualistic foundations of morality and political theory from the heights of apriorism and metaphysics to the real ground of reality.
From the study of the essence of the individual, he led him to establish the basic properties of human nature to respond to tricks and suffering. John Stuart Mill, having comprehensively examined the principle of Benthamism, gave it a wider illumination. Theorist of the inductive method. Mill covered a wider area in his observations of human nature. He pays attention not only to the emotional side of human nature, but also to the intellectual. The personality thus receives a more complete and broader outline. Bentham, recommending his “tables” and “calaloti” to the legislative body, elected by universal, equal, secret and annual voting, had in mind mainly the criteria of pleasure and pain, based on emotional nature. His entire system therefore had a practical, practical character, operating with the individual as a complex of sensory sensations. The human “I,” as represented by Bentham, although it was the spontaneous and conscious focus of all legal and political calculations, nevertheless, on the other hand, it was considered, in relation to the political concept, as an object of legislative operatives, despite the enormous role assigned to it in the course and direction of legislation. John Stuart Mill did not reject this sensual side of Benthamism, but looked at it as the animal foundation of personality.
On this foundation he built a sublime concept of individuality. And while he was incomparably strong and conscious of his teacher on empirical grounds, he nevertheless made an attempt to overcome the narrowness of Benthamism with broad, but combined with TFM, and with strict, methodological generalizations. Formally, he, to a greater extent, manages to free himself from the aprioritarianism of the 18th century. This is involved in the substantiation of our political, social and legal views on the intellectual side of the human
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
eek grumbles tnten meh