Although they use very different techniques to determine the correct decision, both Kant and Bentham would approve of Eveline's decision to stay at home instead of marrying Frank. There were many factors contributing to Eveline's choice. No matter what the main reason for her decision was, both philosophies prove that the decision was correct.
In the short story “Eveline,” James Joyce portrays the story of a young lady who is caught in conflict between freeing herself from her monotonous life and marrying Frank, the man who loves her deeply, and continuing her life at home. Eveline has the same responsibility many young women in her situation would have had. Her mother has died, leaving her to take care of the house. She is now the caretaker of her younger siblings and her father. One difference between Eveline and the other young women is that she has a job outside the home from which she receives a salary. Of course, all the money she earns is given to her father to be divided between what he wants and what the rest of the household needs. Although she remembers good times before her mother's death, she can not help but feel trapped in a situation which she did not choose.
At the beginning of the story, it seems Eveline has resolved this conflict. Frank appears to be her escape from her alcoholic father. However, three obstacles block her way aboard the ship to happiness. Against what some people would believe, the fact that her father doubts Frank's love for Eveline has nothing to do with her final decision. One reason she stays is that she never really loved Frank. He was simply her way out. Also important was the promise she had made to her mother that she would keep the family together as long as she could. The main thing that stood in her way, however, was her love for her younger siblings. She did not want to leave them in the situation into which she had been forced.
Was Eveline's decision correct according to her situation? Jeremy Bentham would say yes. His theory, known as utilitarianism, begins with the principle of pleasure versus pain. It appears to be instinct that we seek to find pleasure and to avoid pain. Bentham says that we must always look to the future. For if we grab the first sight of pleasure, there is often pain that follows. Eveline was aware of this. Even though Frank would have saved her from her troubles in the present, her end result would not have been pleasure. The marriage to a man she did not love would have only brought about more pain.
It makes no difference to Bentham what Eveline's motive was. Bentham believed that motives were never measured until after the outcome. His theory stated that if the outcome is good, the motive must have been good. Although his idea seems outlandish, according to that idea, Eveline's decision was correct. The outcome of her leaving the children would have been terrible for them. They would have been left with a drunken and violent father, with no motherly figure to look after them.
This is what Bentham's philosophy focused on – the outcomes. The question one must ask is what will be the result of the chosen action. He attempted to scientifically measure pain and pleasure in order to make better choices through what he called the hedonistic calculus. He felt it necessary to consider the intensity of a decision. Next, one is instructed to think about the duration and certainty. Even determining whether or not the results will be immediate is important to Bentham's hedonistic calculus. He would have told Eveline to consider the fecundity, or the chance that a pleasure fulfilling decision has of being followed by more pleasure. Although immediate pleasure would have come if Eveline had decided to marry Frank, it would not have lasted. There was no certainty that her life would have been the way she hoped. The effect that her decision would have on others is also a major part to Bentham's hedonistic calculus. Eveline knew that the children would never make it without her, so she had to stay for them.
When one realizes that Bentham's utilitarianistic beliefs are not always accurate, Kant's philosophy is what to fall back on. Immanuel Kant tried to give a way to decide how to act so that one will not feel guilty about that decision. Kant believes that, in order to obtain happiness, one must be worthy. It does not always guarantee happiness, but there will never be guilt about the decision. Worthiness can be obtained with two tools – your reason and your will. This means that you will do the required duty to the best of your ability.
As Kant states it, “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should be a universal law.” He would use this categorical imperative to prove that Eveline's decision should not have been made in any other way. For one, Kant says that we must never use another human being as a means to our ends. Eveline chose not to go aboard with Frank, partly because she knew she was using Frank as a way out.
A major concept in Kant's theory is that Eveline should look at the whole situation in universal terms. Should it be a universal law that anyone left in charge of children should leave when they feel trapped? Kant would agree with Eveline that it would not be best for the others in her life. Kant would say that she has received her worthiness.
So, was Eveline correct in her decision to stay at home? Although neither philosophy is totally accurate, both Bentham and Kant would agree that she had no better choice. In order to be happy, and be worthy of that happiness, she simply could not allow herself to leave the children behind.
Arachnophilia.