Despite their significant differences, Jeremy Bentham and Auguste Comte represent the two main advocates of an utilitarian and progressivist critique of human rights. In Bentham, this critique finds its liberal incarnation since he stresses the pre-eminence of collective utility as the agregation of individual utilities. Bentham dismisses the notion of man's natural rights as a "Nonsense Upon Stilts" which lead to anarchy, tyranny and selfishness. Comte represents the social incarnation of this utilitarian and progressivist critique of human rights since he considers social utility as the utility of the whole social body understood as an indivisible organism greater than the sum of its parts. Comte differs from Bentham since for the former the structuring principle of an industrial society is not 'individual self-interest' but the optimal development of human activities depending on their means and ends. In the last part of the chapter, we move from Bentham and Comte to elucidate the links between 'social rights" and 'individual rights' .