Now it is time to discuss Kant’s polar opposite in the field of philosophy and ethics, John Stuart Mill. Mill is the man who cultivated the principles of utilitarianism. In utilitarianism, this segment of philosophy tries to promote a lot of the things Kant would of consider to be absolute detriments. Utilitarianism tries to foster an overall happiness for the human race and by doing so Mill tries to focus extensively on the consequences of actions. Mill would often support the idea that happiness is the foundation to the idea of morality. Most things in life are items of desire in which incorporate a means to happiness or intersect with the standard definition of happiness. Therefore, impartiality is based entirely on utility. Those privileges
In Defense of Utilitarianism, J.S. Mill In the excerpt from John Stuart Mill’s book, Utilitarianism, Mill defends the utilitarian theory against three different objections. The first, and strongest opposition to utilitarianism was the accusation that the emphasis on the pursuit of pleasure makes utilitarianism “a doctrine worthy of swine.” This was my favorite argument because Mill defended it so well stating that there are varying degrees of pleasure. He refers to them as “high” and “low” pleasures, which I do agree with.
1. Utilitarianism Philosopher View (Jeremy Bentham & John Mill) Utilitarianism theory was founded by Jeremy Bentham and then got expanded by John Mill who came up with the 2 types or forms of Utilitarianism which are Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism says an action is right if it tends to promote happiness, and wrong if it tends to produce the reverse of happiness and doesn’t just involve the happiness of the performer of the action but also that of everyone affected by it.
John Stuart Mill wrote What Utilitarianism Is to shift the focus from the quantity of happiness to the quality of happiness by introducing the lower and higher pleasures. Mill refers to lower pleasures as physical and higher pleasures as mental. Those who fall under the lower category are the type of people whose standards are low meaning that they are most likely to be satisfied. On the other hand, those who fall under the higher category are more like to have high standards making it hard to be satisfied easily. A higher pleasure can be something that had to be done with effort and meaning, while a lower pleasure could be something you need.
In Utilitarianism, Mill provides many defenses for criticisms of utilitarian ideals and expands on the theory with his own ideas. While discussing morals and actions that cause them, Mill glances past a discussion that I think is important. On page 756, Mill states that the motives behind actions are not important in determining what is morally right, only the action itself does. I believe that the motives are an important part in determining morality.
John Stuart Mill, at the very beginning of chapter 2 entitled “what is utilitarianism”. starts off by explaining to the readers what utility is, Utility is defined as pleasure itself, and the absence of pain. This leads us to another name for utility which is the greatest happiness principle. Mill claims that “actions are right in proportions as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” “By Happiness is intended pleasure and the absence of pain, by happiness, pain and the privation of pleasure”.
Values Mill would most likely not support would most likely be something along the lines Kant followed, as a Utilitarian,
The age old question of what is moral has lingered in Philosopher’s minds for ages. In order to answer this question, we must know what morality is, and define exactly that. Humans are diverse sentient beings, and having the same morals uniformly is impossible, however when we look at theories that philosophers have proposed, there is a vast amount of speculation as to what makes anything moral. In this essay, I will be deconstructing the ideas of morality and John Stuart Mill’s theory of utilitarianism, helping me by opening opportunities to critique his arguments and concepts. Morality is the concept of what is right and what is wrong.
John Stuart Mill’s theory states that people will choose to follow the principals of utility because they seek the favor of friends and neighbor or they fear the specter of God. Utilitarianism also teaches that education should prepare all persons to attach their own happiness to the happiness of their whole community. In the scenario with me (district attorney) and my friend (nursing home administrator); we would solve this dilemma of utilitarianism by meeting the happiness of the 400 patients by allowing Dr. Jill Kevorkian to assist in the suicide of the patients. My friend (nursing administrator) used the ethics of consequence to approach the situation; also, my friend (nursing administrator) was trying to do more good by filling the needs
Mill believed that for an action to be deemed right it must promote or result in happiness. In the same way, a wrong action would be one that brings about sadness. But, this could result in a false thought that we are talking about personal happiness. No. what matters is the happiness of a majority.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory based on the idea people should act in a way that produces the greatest optimal utility. In other words, people’s choices should achieve the greatest amount or benefits for the greatest amount of people and oneself. In this paper, I will argue the Hedonistic view point John Stuart Mill presents is a more refined branch of utilitarianism because of Mill’s concept of higher and lower pleasures . This paper is broken into two main sections. I will begin by outlining Mill’s Hedonistic Utilitarianism.
Utilitarianism is one of the approaches used by legislators to help them in their decision making. John Mill is one of those who conceived that approach,
When we first started learning about John Stuart Mills’ Theory, I thought it was going to be overly simple. The book Utilitarianism by Mill was a very short read, but it contained a lot of important information. After learning more about his theory, I found it to be quite interesting. It ended up being more relatable than what I originally thought it would be. When we know what we are looking for, we can apply his theory to many situations and aspects of our daily lives.
In On Liberty, Mill portrays the concept of liberty as valuable as a vehicle towards the end goal of maximizing utility. For Mill, such examples are consistent with utilitarianism since happiness is the only concept seen as an end in and of itself. In Chapter 3 ‘On Individuality’, Mill argues that individuality is of worth since it promotes happiness for the individual which in turn means there is happiness for society as a whole (BASPT p.640). Since Mill consistently views liberty as an extrinsic value, which shows liberty is not part of the essential nature of his theory, he stays consistent with the principle of utility that promotes happiness as the only intrinsic value to aim for. For Mill, as long as liberty is valued as a means to the
by the limit of Mill’s Utilitarianism. I would only focus on Mill’s charge of Kant’s moral law. Because it might be superfluous for my purpose to discuss Mill’s utilitarianism on its own accord, much like discussing Hegel’s own philosophy in the earlier section. 2.2.1 Mill’s Utilitarianism Mill 's critique of Kant derives from the philosophical perspective of Utilitarianism.
John Stuart Mill is the philosopher I chose, his focus is on utilitarianism. Contrary to popular belief utility is based on pleasure. Based on utilitarianism some pleasures are more desirable and valuable than others. Quality over quantity is the case for pleasures. You can get a ton of lower pleasures or a few higher pleasures and most humans would prefer to take the few higher pleasures.