Nick Justice Dr. Felis PAR-101-003 8 November 2015 Mid-Term Paper: Locke & Mill This paper will explain Mill’s argument and then make an argument that Locke and Mill would not agree on the idea of free speech. Prior to comparing them to Locke’s arguments, it is important to understand Mill’s view on free speech. In chapter 2 of On Liberty, Mill concludes that "If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind." [Mill p11]
The object of this essay is to show a simple evaluation of john Stuart mill principle “an action is right that it does not cause harm to another person” I will be exercising both evaluations and explaining why the positive side outweighs the negative side of the principle, in a society that it’s people are emancipated to control their own opinions. Mill Stuart in his autobiography of 1873 he narrates liberty as a philosophic chronicle of indivisible accuracy. (Mill (1989.edn).p.189) rather than speaking of rights, many claim a ‘right’ not to be harmed ,mill says that only a harm or risk to harm is enough vindication for using power above someone else. John Stuart moreover he adequate his principle by reckoning that it is not good to use power
Whether it is at the dinner table or in my family’s group text message, the conversation about my brother’s custody battle with my mother’s side of the family seems to remain a bitter topic, especially when discussing my role in it. When my father physically harmed my brother to the extent to which he had to go to the emergency room, the custody trial over my brother and me began. After several sources provided the judge with accusations against my father, I was the final source that needed to assert or deny my father’s abuse; with heavy consideration, I decided to lie to the judge by denying my father’s abuse. Under the principle of utilitarianism, philosophers would infer that lying is permissible if the consequences of doing so are good.
The purpose of this essay is to pick apart Mill’s essay and to give my own personal opinion about happiness. Stuart believed that you could achieve happiness by helping others achieve happiness and by finding things that you enjoy in life. I believe the key to happiness is helping other people achieve their happiness, do things that you enjoy doing, and looking at things in the brightest way possible. I honestly believe that everyone wakes up in the morning wanting to be happy, I have never seen a person who wakes up saying, “ I want to have an absolutely miserable day today”. It is human nature to strive for happiness and do things that you enjoy doing.
When studying philosophy, a student becomes very aware of the contradiction and different opinions of highly remarked philosophers. Many students become frustrated with the opposition and question the importance of the study all together. Others choose to indulge in these differences to further their understanding beyond what he/ she thought capable of beforehand. The obvious contradictions between Kant’s deontology, and Bentham’s and Mill’s utilitarianism is a perfect example of such occasion in philosophy.
When looking at various forms of moral reasoning in government parties’ principles such as individual morality, fairness, and respect for persons are all subjective based on an individuals’ needs, wants, beliefs, etc. In other words, stances on what is moral will vary from person to person, and thus these particular principles become irrelevant in a national competition known as the Presidential Election. Thus I turn to Mill’s utilitarian principle. Mill’s principle states that any action must promote happiness in the total population to be ruled moral. Stated more simply: majority of the populace must be “happy” with federal decisions, and majority’s happiness is what determines morality.
Introduction: John Stuart Mill essay on Consideration On representative Government, is an argument for representative government. The ideal form of government in Mill's opinion. One of the more notable ideas Mill is that the business of government representatives is not to make legislation. Instead Mill suggests that representative bodies such as parliaments and senates are best suited to be places of public debate on the various opinions held by the population and to act as watchdogs of the professionals who create and administer laws and policy.
The Golden Rule Many philosophers have views on Ethics. The moral approaches of Kant, Mill, Aristotle, and Held are all vastly different. “Kant’s principle of morality is based on his belief that the means justifies the end” (O’Neil, Onora). Mill believes in Utilitarianism, believing that “one should act in a way that produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people” (Mill, John, 118).
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”.
Mill states, “Here the question is not whether one’s individual act would maximize goodness, but whether goodness would be maximized if everyone did the act (Ethics Theory and Issues, “John Stuart Mill (1806-1873): Revised Utilitarianism 127).” In this version of a utilitarianism, what's most important is
Utilitarian theory This theory reveals that an act can only be considered to be ethical if its end result is happiness for the majority affected by that particular act, as per the point that the ultimate goal of human beings is to be happy. The person who came with this theory, John Stuart Mill calls it the greatest happiness principle. In order for a person to come to the conclusion that the majority will be happy with the outcome, it means that the practical outcome of an act must be looked at to determine such. When applying this theory in the state being captured by the Guptas family: the family will benefit from this, if they control or influence the state the decision taken will benefit them more. From doing so the family has built
John Stuart Mill’s notion of higher pleasures addresses the utilitarian criticism of a common currency of value or in other words, the notion that utilitarianism reduces all values to a single scale. Bentham’s utilitarianism is hedonistic in that he believes that all pleasures/preferences are equal. Mill’s approach is different and more eudemonistic. Sandel points out the example of Romans throwing Christians to the lions from earlier in the book and states that it would be better to change the preferences the Romans have of seeing something so perverse rather than to satisfy the pleasures gained from viewing something so vile. According to Bentham all pleasure is equal as he states that “pleasure is pleasure and pain is pain” (52).However the pleasure that the onlookers receive from such a thing is perverse and not a positive pleasure such as the pleasure you receive from exercising.
Utilitarianism is the theory that invokes the greatest, and least amount of pain and pleasure for the more vast amount of individuals (majority). Utilitarianism is rather a mechanism to find the ‘common ground’ between individuals of different mindsets, and, therefore, make a mutualistic agreement that will either bring great joy, or cause the least destruction. Two philosophers, Jeremy Bentham, the first philosopher to having thought of this concept, and John Stuart Mill, the philosopher who emphasized certain extent of a pleasure are considered great influences to the concept of Utilitarianism. The purpose of this essay is to consider the extent of John Stuart Mill’s influence on Jeremy Bentham’s theory. Jeremy Bentham’s theory is the generalization
Of the many theories and theorists discussed in our History and systems of Psychology class, the Utilitarianism theory stood out to me the most. This theory, founded around the 18th and 19th century by philosophers (theorists) Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Their theory purports that, “social, economical or political decisions should be made for, the betterment of society. It bases the moral worth of an action upon the number of people it gives happiness or pleasure to” (Investopedia, 2017).
Being Free 1st draft Freedom is word used in a lot of contexts, but the official meaning of the word is “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants” (Freedom). Meaning that you have the right to do something, with the focus being on you as an individual. This means no one can tell you what to do, like for example a state. This is an important aspect and part of political theory. Liberty is also used and viewed as the same category of theory, and has the definition “The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s behavior or political views” (Liberty).
