Abstract: The elementary factors of Jeremy Bentham's utilitarianismare principles of pleasure and pain, consequentialism, and principles of utility. There aredilemmas among three of them. Bentham do not divide different qualities among pleasures and pains, which ,J. S. Mill thinks, is a mistake and he corrects it. Unfortunately, the revision by Mill exposes the inherent discord between principles of pleasure and pain and consequentialism. Meanwhile, That Mill complements self-sacrifice to principles of utility also exposes contradiction of principlesof utility. What is more, Mill defends the principle of most happiness by appealing to equal right of human being , which exactly indicates that principle of utility is not an ultimate principle. J.J.C. Smart's Utilitarianism of Action exposes the unjust character of utilitarianism. From the above three types of utilitarianism we can draw a conclusion that utilitarianism can not rid off its internally logic dilemma if it only appeal to the principle of utility. Richard B. Brand appeals to the theory of knowledge of action and deontology, and saves utilitarianism from its dilemma.

Key words: utilitarianism, principle of pleasure and pain, the principle of the most happiness, utilitarianism of action utilitarianism of rule

摘要： 边沁的功利主义为苦乐原理、效果论和功利原则这样三个理论基点所构成。这是一个有着内在逻辑困境的三原理。苦乐原理由于没有进行内在的质的区分,为密尔所修正,但密尔的修正突出了苦乐原理与效果论的内在不一致;同时,密尔以自我牺牲来补充功利主义,又暴露了功利主义原则的内在矛盾。还有,密尔以平等权利来为功利主义的最大幸福原理辩护,恰恰表明功利原则并非是可以成为一个理论的基础性原则或终极原则。斯马特的行动功利主义则进一步暴露了功利主义的非正义性特性。功利主义的这样三个典范表明仅仅诉诸功利原则无从走出内在逻辑困境。布兰特援引认知理论以及道义论原则,笔者认为这才使功利主义从其困境中走出。

关键词: 功利主义, 苦乐原理, 最大幸福原理, 行动功利主义, 准则功利主义