Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Utilitarianism john stuart mill essay
Ethical theories of aristotle mill and kant
Utilitarianism john stuart mill essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Utilitarianism john stuart mill essay
Happiness is a term that typically has different definitions. Some define happiness, as the things one possess; others may define it as doing a good deed and the feeling one has after doing a good deed. Merriam-Webster defines happiness as, “a state of well-being and contentment” . Even Aristotle acknowledges that everyone disagrees on the definition of happiness because we all have a different thought-process and prior knowledge. Even though there are many definitions to happiness, both Aristotle and John Stuart Mill take a similar approach when attempting to define happiness in their books. Aristotle and Mill discuss their theories of happiness and pleasure, and their views of virtue in ethics and its relation to happiness. Aristotle and Mill may have been writing at different times, and did not necessarily have the same beliefs, but both philosophers took a similar position when defining happiness.
Aristotle was born in 384 BCE, and died in 322 BCE . There is no exact date listed for when Aristotle completed Nicomachean Ethics, but many believe that it was written around 350-340 BCE . Aristotle was a scientist, as well as a philosopher. Some of the discussions Aristotle has within Nicomachean Ethics were approached from a biological perspective. Even though Aristotle is writing a book on ethics, many subjects of Nicomachean Ethics are political. The ultimate thing Aristotle was trying to do in Nicomachean Ethics was to exam the lives of virtuous human beings.
Hundreds of years later, John Stuart Mill released his novel, On Liberty and Utilitarianism. John Stuart Mill practiced of Utilitarianism, “the belief that a morally good action is one that helps the greatest number of people” . Mill uses the idea of “the greatest ...
... middle of paper ...
... Aristotle and Mill when defining happiness, they have similar ways of approaching the topic of happiness. It is a possibility that Mill is responding to Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, from a Utilitarian view. Both Aristotle and Mill agreed that a man has greater capacity for happiness and reason. Though they have many similarities, Aristotle and Mill have many differences. Overall, Mill believed that a person achieved happiness by experiencing pleasure, or absence of pain. While, Aristotle believed that happiness came is from living out one’s full potential and to live with reason in mind.
Works Cited
"Happiness." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 21 Nov. 2013.
Shields, Christopher. "Aristotle." Stanford University. Stanford University, 25 Sept. 2008. Web. 21 Nov. 2013.
"Utilitarianism." Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 21 Nov. 2013.
Nevertheless, while Utilitarianism is the key approach of Mill's politics, in On Liberty, Mill's ideal of utility departs from this discourse by disregarding the concept of natural rights. As mentioned earlier, individuality derives from personal development and self-realisation, 'grounded on the permanent interests of man as a progressive beings' (Mill, [1859] 2009, p.20), and this is the true utility of individuality. Thus, 'higher pleasures' (intellectual and moral) are valued more than base pleasures (physical or emotional), contributing to the society, and producing higher forms of happiness. In this sense, Mill 'left the true utilitarian spirit far behind' (Berkowitz, 200, p.148). Within his model, utility no longer accepts 'lower pleasures', embracing the most virtuous principles of individuality and liberty of
Utilitarianism defined, is the contention that a man should judge everything based on the ability to promote the greatest individual happiness. In other words Utilitarianism states that good is what brings the most happiness to the most people. John Stuart Mill based his utilitarian principle on the decisions that we make. He says the decisions should always benefit the most people as much as possible no matter what the consequences might be. Mill says that we should weigh the outcomes and make our decisions based on the outcome that benefits the majority of the people. This leads to him stating that pleasure is the only desirable consequence of our decision or actions. Mill believes that human beings are endowed with the ability for conscious thought, and they are not satisfied with physical pleasures, but they strive to achieve pleasure of the mind as well.
Simply defined, happiness is the state of being happy. But, what exactly does it mean to “be happy?” Repeatedly, many philosophers and ideologists have proposed ideas about what happiness means and how one attains happiness. In this paper, I will argue that Aristotle’s conception of happiness is driven more in the eye of ethics than John Stuart Mill. First, looking at Mill’s unprincipled version of happiness, I will criticize the imperfections of his definition in relation to ethics. Next, I plan to identify Aristotle’s core values for happiness. According to Aristotle, happiness comes from virtue, whereas Mill believes happiness comes from pleasure and the absence of pain. Ethics are the moral principles that govern a person’s behavior which are driven by virtues - good traits of character. Thus, Aristotle focuses on three things, which I will outline in order to answer the question, “what does it mean to live a good life?” The first of which is the number one good in life is happiness. Secondly, there is a difference between moral virtues and intellectual virtues and lastly, leading a good life is a state of character. Personally and widely accepted, happiness is believed to be a true defining factor on leading a well intentioned, rational, and satisfactory life. However, it is important to note the ways in which one achieves their happiness, through the people and experiences to reach that state of being. In consequence, Aristotle’s focus on happiness presents a more arguable notion of “good character” and “rational.”
John Stuart Mill (1808-73) believed in an ethical theory known as utilitarianism. There are many formulation of this theory. One such is, "Everyone should act in such a way to bring the largest possibly balance of good over evil for everyone involved." However, good is a relative term. What is good? Utilitarians disagreed on this subject.
John Stuart Mill argues that the rightness or wrongness of an action, or type of action, is a function of the goodness or badness of its consequences, where good consequences are ones that maximize the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. In this essay I will evaluate the essential features of Mill’s ethical theory, how that utilitarianism gives wrong answers to moral questions and partiality are damaging to Utilitarianism.
Mill, John Stuart. "Utilitarianism." Gendler, Tamar Szabo, Susanna Siegel and Steven M. Cahn. The Elements of Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. 77-80.
Mill, John Stewart. "Utilitarianism: John Stewart Mill." Fifty Readings Plus: An Introduction to Philosophy. Ed. Donald C. Abel. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 2004. 416-25. Print.
Happiness is a goal every human pursues, yet the ways in which it is pursued differs amongst people. Some believe prosperity will bring them happiness. Others believe material, power, fame, success, or love will bring them happiness. No matter what one believes is the right way to conquer this goal, every person will take their own unique path in an attempt to find it. But what is happiness? Happiness is often viewed as a subjective state of mind in which one may say they are happy when they are on vacation with friends, spending time with their family, or having a cold beer on the weekend while basking in the sun. However, Aristotle and the Stoics define happiness much differently. In Aristotle’s
Cahn, Steven M., and Peter J. Markie. "John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism; Chapter 2: What Utilitarianism Is." 2009. Ethics: History, Theory, and Contemporary Issues. 4th ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2009. 330-41. Print.
In his essay, Utilitarianism Mill elaborates on Utilitarianism as a moral theory and responds to misconceptions about it. Utilitarianism, in Mill’s words, is the view that »actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.«1 In that way, Utilitarianism offers an answer to the fundamental question Ethics is concerned about: ‘How should one live?’ or ‘What is the good or right way to live?’.
At the checkout line, we try to find the shortest line so we can get out the door more quickly. We make most of our financial decisions on a utilitarian calculus of cost and benefits. These actions illustrate us trying to make the best decision for ourselves that have the most favorable outcome. Therefore, when these actions are done, happiness is an expected outcome. Whether it is for the greater good or the person who uses utilitarianism on an day to day basis. Furthermore, Aristotle's views on John Stuart Mill utilitarianism is very similar but differs in meaning. John Stuart Mill believes that pleasure and freedom from pain are what make up someone’s happiness. Aristotle, on the other hand believes that happiness comes from virtue. Both Mill and Aristotle believe that the end of the human being’s life is happiness. Happiness, however, takes a different meaning for both of them. Aristotle believes that it is living life in accordance to reason and Mill believe it is living life to achieve the highest pleasure and the least pain. Generally speaking, Aristotle and Mill understand the importance of happiness however they differ in the definition of
Happiness can be understood as the moral goal of life or can be unpredictable and is something we create from ourselves and by ourselves. The idea of happiness was known as something we nurture on our own and is a state of emotion. Completing our everyday goals will soon bring us happiness, which seems to be very important to most humans and is what makes life worth living, but this is not certain. This conception of Eudemonia was common in ancient Greece as it is currently today. Aristotle had what he thought was an ideal activity for all those who wanted to live life to the fullest, be happy, and have purpose.
1. Aristotle said the final cause, the goal of life, for a human being happiness? Aristotle called happiness ( Eudaemonia ) the highest good and the end at which all our activities ultimately aim. he draw the Socrates view that the highest good happiness must be something proper to the person. Mill said that happiness is a pleasure and the absence of pain. The achievement goals of the people should be counts as part of their happiness. Kant disagreed what they meant about about happiness and defines happiness as get thing what one wants or continuous well- being and enjoyment of life. I would say that the philosophers definition of happiness is the same. Based on my own understanding happiness is a freedom and being satisfied on what you have.
According to Webster dictionary the word Happiness in defined as Enjoying, showing, or marked by pleasure, satisfaction, or joy. People when they think of happiness, they think about having to good feeling inside. There are many types of happiness, which are expressed in many ways. Happiness is something that you can't just get it comes form your soul. Happiness is can be changed through many things that happen in our every day live.
Happiness can be viewed as wealth, honour, pleasure, or virtue. Aristotle believes that wealth is not happiness, because wealth is just an economic value, but can be used to gain some happiness; wealth is a means to further ends. The good life, according to Aristotle, is an end in itself. Similar to wealth, honour is not happiness because honour emphases on the individuals who honour in comparison to the honouree. Honour is external, but happiness is not. It has to do with how people perceive one another; the good life is intrinsic to the...