1. 研究目的与意义（文献综述包含参考文献）

1. Introduction 1.1 Research background Utilitarianism is a theory of moral philosophy (ethics), which advocates the pursuit of ”maximum happiness”. The core of the theory of utilitarianism is that human#8217;s behavior should help to achieve ”the greatest happiness of the greatest majority”. The main philosophers are John Stuart Mill, Jeremy Bentham, and so on. Currently, utilitarianism is the most effective ethical theory of public policy making. The public policy which under the principle of utilitarianism may have very bad consequences, for example, ”for the sake of the happiness of most people, the demolition of the small number#8217;s houses is reasonable”. But if other theories are used as a guiding principle, it may have much worse consequences. It is clear that utilitarianism is not only a political but a philosophical standpoint. As a democratic concept, for many years, it has become the basis for legislative and judicial progress, social reform, welfare movement, and equality development. Hard Times, one of the most influential novels of the nineteenth century, compiled by the famous British writer Charles Dickens, which incisively reflected utilitarianism. Since its publication, the book has been sold well and has been translated into dozens of languages in the world. The story in the book has infected the hearts of readers from generation to generation, which has a positive impact to readers, especially to the young people, whether be used as a language learning book or popular literature. In the novel, Gradgrind was a member of Congress, the so-called ”educator”, who smugly advocated a set of education method of suppressing human nature while the wealthy businessman Bounderby claimed himself as a self-made success. They together controlled the economic system and educational institutions of the town and had common values, that is, took utilitarianism as the principle of life. 1.2 Purpose and Significance of the Study The influence of utilitarianism is very extensive. For the last two centuries, Utilitarianism has always had great influence on, not only philosophy field, but also politics and economics, which subjects are apparently more practical. Owing to this influence, there are lots of pragmatism hypotheses and arguments in modern economic and political life. And that influence is typically embodied in public policy. It is quite necessary for us to comprehend traditional utilitarian if we want to understand the social world which we lived in incisively. Because of the influence that utilitarianism had caused in Numerous fields, vulgar had been affected much by utilitarianism as well. First, vulgar changed their way of thinking or doing under the guidance of Utilitarianism. People would think much more about interests and have no regard of ethics. What#8217;s more, utilitarianism influenced legislation while adressatedes rechts are exactly the vulgar. They must obey the rule without any doubt. On the economic policy, the early utilitarian tended to support free trade and objected to government#8217;s intervention. Later, because of the utilitarian lost confidence of the social efficiency of the private enterprises, they wanted government#8217;s intervention to correct the shortcomings of the private enterprises. Although vulgar had no right to decide the economic policy, they were definitely affected by it. Charles Dickens#8217;s masterpiece Hard Times is exactly a classic novel which typically displays the social image under the utilitarianism. The vivid description of the characters in Hard Times allows readers to get close to the inner world of Charles Dickens and his critical thinking of utilitarianism. The study hopes to dig out the profound influence of utilitarianism on vulgar so much as to have a deeper understanding of utilitarianism. 2. Literature review 2.1 Definition of Utilitarianism 2.1.1 Jeremy Bentham (2000): Utility Bentham (2000) proposed the word ”utility” in his book An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. He wrote that ”By utility is meant that property in any object, whereby it tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness, (all this in the present case comes to the same thing) or (what comes again to the same thing) to prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil, or unhappiness to the party whose interest is considered: if that party be the community in general, then the happiness of the community: if a particular individual, then the happiness of that individual”. He maintained the theory of utility, meant by it, not something to be contradistinguished from pleasure, but pleasure itself, together with exemption from pain; and instead of opposing the useful to the agreeable or the ornamental, have always declared that the useful means these, among other things. Jeremy Bentham#8217;s (2000) utilitarianism political philosophy is based on his critique of traditional thoughts of contract. He advocated the pursuit of maximum happiness. It professed that social happiness was the sum of personal happiness and social interests was the greatest happiness of the most people. If everyone in society was actively seeking their own interests, to a certain extent, social interests would be promoted and society would achieve progress. 2.1.2 John Stuart Mill (1871): Utilitarianism John Stuart Mill (1871) detailed elaborated utilitarianism. First he gave classic answer to the basic question of ethics, he wrote in his book Utilitarianism ”The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” On this basis, Mill (1871) made a further clarification of the concept of ”happiness” or ”pleasure”. First, ”happiness” or ”pleasure” is homogeneous, so it can be compared and aggregated in the interpersonal relationship. Second, the basis of utilitarianism is the nature of human beings to avoid suffering human nature and the egoism theory. Mill (1871) pointed out that the utilitarian morality did not oppose self-sacrifice, but refused to admit that the sacrifice is itself a good. A sacrifice that did not increase or tended to increase the total amount of happiness, then it was a waste. The only applauded self-sacrifice was devotion to the happiness of others or to some means of favoring others' happiness. The principle of utility had all the sanctions which belonged to any other system of morals. Those sanctions were either external or internal. Like all other moral standards, the conscientious feelings of mankind were the sanction of utility moral standards. There was no doubt that this sanction had no restraint for those who did not possess the feelings of conscience. These people would not follow the utilitarian moral principle or any other moral principles. For them, any morality did not work unless through external sanctions. 2.2 Previous studies on Utilitarianism 2.2.1 John Rawls (1971): A Theory of Justice John Rawls (1971), Harvard University Professor, his work A Theory of Justice had aroused extensive attention in the western countries since it was first published in 1971. It was regarded as one of the most important works in western political philosophy, law and moral philosophy after the Second World War. Rawls (1971) was sure that utilitarian justice has several drawbacks: (a) It did not reveal the difference between the demands of freedom and rights and the desire for social welfare growth. It did not justify the principle of justice. Justice believed that it#8217;s wrong to deprive someone#8217;s freedom to make others enjoy the benefits. Political transactions and social interests couldn#8217;t be the reason for hindering people#8217;s fundamental rights. (b) It was not appropriate to assume the adjustment principle of the human society as the extension of the individual choice principle. It didn#8217;t take the agreed principle as the basis of justice so the content of the principle couldn#8217;t be adjusted to the macro standards which suitable to all people. (c) It was a teleological theory. But the real principle of justice is set in advance; we couldn#8217;t judge it from the results. (4) It showed that the fulfillment of any desire itself is of value. But it didn#8217;t distinguish the nature of these desires and their influence on happiness, which expressed as a direct criticism of utilitarianism. Rawls (1971) thought that utilitarianism may be divided into classic utilitarianism and average utilitarianism, the latter of which has more advantages than the former. 2.2.2 Henry Sidgwick (1993) : The Methods of Ethics Henry Sidgwick (1993), a representative of utilitarianism at the end of the nineteenth century, argued that utilitarianism came from the reflection of the ”common sense” moral system. He argued that most of the common sense of morality is required to be based on utilitarianism. He also believed that utilitarianism can solve the difficulties and confusion which brought about by the ambiguity and contradictions of common sense. In Bentham#8217;s (2000) utilitarianism, utilitarianism and rational egoism was completely the same thing. However, Sidgwick (1993) thought that was wrong. In his book The Methods of Ethics, he distinguished egoism from utilitarianism. He believed that individual actually pursued their own happiness was not equal to individual pursued public happiness. It is the first time that the utilitarianism and egoism are completely separated. He also suggested that to correct this error ”reasonable love” must be added to Bentham#8217;s (1789) utilitarianism. Sidgwick (1993) and Bentham#8217;s (2000) understanding of happiness was different. Bentham (2000) is a perceptual hedonist while Sidgwick (1993) adhered to rational pleasure. But Sidgwick (1993) and Bentham (2000) both thought that happiness can be compared. In that aspect Sidgwick (1993) returned to Bentham#8217;s (1789) position, maintained the inherent unity of the theory of hedonism. 2.3 Previous studies on Hard Times A mass of critics and scholars were attracted to be involved in analyzing Hard Times. There published papers mainly on plots, characters and themes of the novel. In addition, one of the reasons that the novel has drawn so much attention is the profound critical thinking. Character image and the critique of utilitarianism are the most often studied of this novel. Chen (2011) and Hu (2016) made their reviews on the novel from different perspectives. Chen (2011) attempted to use Freud#8217;s theory of personality structure to analyze Dicken#8217;s Hard Times. The core part was mainly about the embodiment of the id, ego and superego#8212;the three parts in the personality structure in Hard Times. Furthermore, it revealed that the psychological mechanism of personality structure is fully embodied in the novel. The purpose of that paper was to analyze the characters by using the theory of personality structure to reveal the inner psychological factors of characters#8217; fate in Hard Times. However, different from Chen#8217;s (2011) article, Hu#8217;s (2016) paper was based on the analysis of the characters in the Hard Times as the main starting point, and analyzed Dickens#8217; description of the characters. Chen (2011) from the literary writing techniques aspect to analyze Hard Times and found the profound hidden meaning of the depiction of the character image. 3. Deficiency in previous studies Many of the domestic ethical writings misunderstood the utilitarianism as a kind of selfish behavior of ordinary people in their daily lives. This misunderstanding couldn#8217;t explain the guiding role of utilitarianism in various social sciences. What#8217;s worse it caused serious ideological confusion, which has had a bad influence on theoretical research and practice. From the text above, we could find that Bentham (2000) and Mill#8217;s utilitarianism (1871), which thought utilitarianism and egoism was completely the same thing was flawed. Then because of the mere separation of the relationship between personal happiness and general happiness, Sidgwick (1993) couldn#8217;t solve the contradiction between utilitarianism and egoism, and finally fell into the dualism of practical and theory. The greatest flaw of utilitarianism was it attained too much emphasis on the value of the group rather than the value of the individual; attained too much emphasis on the whole rather than the parts. Overly relying on a single certified parameter but ignoring those important factors which were difficult to find and prove in reality. It emphasized that you would have your own value and judgments according to the actual in your life. But it did not solve the problem of how to regulate conflicts between individuals aroused by the different value. Works Cited Bentham. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Commercial Press, 2000. Bernard Williams and J. J. C. Smart. ”A Critique of Utilitarianism.” Utilitarianism For and Against, Cambridge University Press, 1973. Pp75-150. Carlos Hoevel. ”A Critique of Political Utilitarianism [M].” Springer Netherlands:2013. Charles Dickens. Hard Times. Tsinghua University Press, 2010. Charles Dickens. Hard Times. Shanghai World Book Publishing Company. 2012 Cheng, Shuangshuang. ”Personality Structure in Hard Time.” Central South University, 2011. Gong, Qun. [龚群]，对以边沁、密尔为代表的功利主义的分析批判．伦理学研究，No.4,2003． Henry Sidgwick. The Methods of Ethics. China Social Sciences Press, 1993. Hu, Guanghua. [胡光华]，狄更斯《艰难时世》中的人物形象研究．吉林广播电视大学学报，2016，（7）．John Stuart Mill. Utilitarianism. Commercial Press, 2016． Jiang, Xi. [蒋曦]，功利主义的非正义性及其原因#8212;#8212;#8212;罗尔斯对功利主义的批判．新余学院学报，Vol.20 NO.1,2015.John Rawls. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1971. John Stuart Mill. On Liberty and Utilitarianism. 1871 Li, Xiaojing. [李晓静]，边沁和密尔功利主义的比较分析．商业文化，2016 N Mar, N Mar'Atuttoyibah. ”Social Class Differences of 19th Century English Society in Charles Dickens Hard Times.” British Journal of Cancer, 1998, 77(11):1961-5 Reidar K. Lie. ”An examination and critique of Harsanyi's version of utilitarianism.” Theory and Decision 21, D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1986. Pp65-83. Stephen Buckle. ”Peter Singer#8217;s Argument for Utilitarianism.” Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 2005, Vol.26 (3), pp.175-194 Tian, Jianping. [田建平], 功利主义哲学统治下的人性#8212;#8212;浅谈《艰难时世》中的人物．《当代教育理论与实践》, 2008 , 30 (3) :8． Tim Mulgan. Understanding Utilitarianism. Shandong People#8217;s Press, 2012 Wang, Fanfan. [汪凡凡]，评析《艰难时世》中的功利主义．湖北函授大学学报，Vol.25 NO.8, 2012． Wang, Yanjun. ”Tragedy of Utilitarianism Rereading Dickens' Hard Times.” Journal of Chongqing Jiaotong University (Social Sciences Edition), 2008, 8(3). Wu, Huaiyu. [巫怀宇]，功利主义的偏见与立即问题研究．南京大学，2016 Wu, Yingping; Li Wen. [吴映萍；李文]，浅析边沁的功利主义思想．文化空间，NO.8, 2010． Xie, Fuhua. [谢伏华]，功利主义：权利与善何者优先？#8212;#8212;#8212;以桑德尔对功利主义的质疑及批判谈起．哲学分析，Vol.5 No.1, 2014． Xu, Dajian; Ren, Junping. [徐大建; 任俊萍], 功利主义究竟表达了什么？#8212;#8212;#8212; 从罗尔斯对功利主义与正义论分歧的论述契入．哲学动态，NO.8,2014． Yao, Jianzhen. ”Charles Dickens#8217; Critique on the Utilitarianism in Hard Times.” University of International Business and Economics, 2015. Zhao, Yue. [赵悦], 典型环境中的典型人物反映19世纪50年代的英国社会#8212;#8212;评析《艰难时世》．现代交际, 2010, (9) ．

2. 研究的基本内容、问题解决措施及方案

1. Research Topic The influence of utilitarianism was very extensive. As one of the most popular philosophies in the Victorian Britain, utilitarianism played an essential role in its development. The critical realism writer, Charles Dickens, strongly criticized the popular utilitarianism at that time in his immoral masterpiece Hard Times, thus revealing the source of the tragic ending of the main characters. Through comparative analysis of the two typical utilitarian believers in the novel-- Gradgrind and Bounderby and other major characters, we would find out that utilitarianism which was prevailing in the British Victorian period destructed human beings a lot. Dickens vividly depicted a depressive and destructive capitalist society, strongly criticized the bourgeois utilitarianism thought, and vigorously promoted the power of emotion and love. Finally he wanted to arouse people#8217;s proper understanding of human nature. In analyzing this novel, better understand utilitarianism and know how it affected the vulgar in both ancient and modern society. 2. Research Methods At the very beginning, the English version and Chinese version are both apparently needed. After finding the reading materials, I set out to intensively read the two versions for the first time，from the Chinese version to the English version, during which the plots are to be generally known and notes are to be properly taken. This action was intended to have a global comprehension on the novel and deep impression of important plots in the novel. Then I set about my second-round reading. Detailed description and key sentences and words are my main focuses which helped author vividly portray characters#8217; features. It is also of necessity to read books and papers about utilitarianism. In addition, some extra references are required so as to have a deeper understanding of utilitarianism. The last but not the least, it is of great help to read again the novel with references. Referring to those materials as well as some advice from my supervisor, I mainly do some research on the effects which utilitarianism does on the vulgar in Hard Times. The thesis is made up by five parts. Background information fills the first part, with the brief introductions to the author Charles Dickens and his book Hard Times. Then significance of the study and purpose of the thesis are to be concluded in the following part. As the main body of the thesis, the second part is mainly about utilitarianism. The definition of utilitarianism and some previous scholars#8217; remarks are also detailed presented. Then how utilitarianism influences vulgar through politics, economics, and law will be displayed. Part three is also the main part of this thesis. It combines utilitarianism and the novel Hard Times together, analyzing the main characters in the novel, such as Gradgrind, Bounderby, Louisa and Tom. Through their tragic fate, reflects the influence of utilitarianism. Part four will discuss two main outcomes that utilitarianism brought out in the novel. Finally, part five will draw a conclusion to the whole thesis. OUTLINE 1. Introduction 1.1 Research background 1.2 Significance of the study 1.3 Research purpose 2. Utilitarianism 2.1 What is Utilitarianism 2.1.1 Definition of Utilitarianism 2.1.2 Previous Studies on Utilitarianism 2.2 Utilitarianism as the Mainstream Ethos in the Victorian Age 2.3 Utilitarianism Affects Many Social Aspects 2.3.1 Politics 2.3.2 Economics 2.3.3 Law 3. Social People under the Utilitarianism in Hard Times 3.1 Bounderby: Embraced labor exploiting 3.2 Gradgrind: Obsessed with Utilitarianism 3.3 Louisa: Meaningless Life 3.4 Tom: Corrupted by Utilitarianism 4. Discussion 4.1 Utilitarianism Intensifies the contradiction between Capitalists and Workers 4.2 Utilitarianism Ruins People#8217;s Love and Happiness 5. Conclusion