Utilitarianism is one of the most commonly used ethical theories from the time it was formulated by Jeremy Bentham and John Stewart Mill in the nineteenth century. In his work, Utilitarianism, Bentham “sought to dispel misconceptions that morality has nothing to do with usefulness or utility or that morality is opposed to pleasure” (MacKinnon, 2012, p. 53). To simplify the utilitarian principle, which is one of utility, one can surmise that morality is equated with the greatest amount of utility or good for the greatest number of people (MacKinnon, 2012). Also, with its orientation to the “end or goal of actions” (MacKinnon, 2012, p. 54), Utilitarianism thus, espouses the consequentialist principle, e.g., the evaluation of any human …show more content…
Because we desire happiness, we thus know it is desirable or good (pp. 60-61). Even with this argument as presented by Mill, there are still questions that remain unanswered, e.g., What is it that people desire, do they desire to be happy or do “they desire what they think will bring them happiness” (MacKinnon, 2012, p. 61)? The criticisms presented thus far, on the “principle of utility as a correct moral principle” (MacKinnon, 2012, p. 60), leaves me to hold a moral judgment and answer to the question, “Utilitarianism: A Workable Moral Theory?” And as cited by Driver (2014) The influence of the Classical Utilitarians has been profound — not only within moral philosophy, but within political philosophy and social policy. The question Bentham asked, “What use is it?” is a cornerstone of policy formation. It is a completely secular, forward-looking question …show more content…
54), stirred two objections: 1) “The act that causes the greatest balance of pleasure over pain for the whole group might be grossly unjust toward some individuals and (2) It’s difficult or impossible to calculate pleasures and pains, and to combine these into a sum-total” (Gensler, n.d.). Thus, the simple calculation of the “greatest amount of happiness” (MacKinnon, 2012, p. 55) to be experienced by the greatest number of people, proved difficult to accept by the opponents of utilitarianism. This writer, for one, would argue that although happiness was touted by the utilitarian as the intrinsic good to be desired, the mode and object of happiness varied and viewed differently by individuals. As Mill elucidated Moreover, in most aspects of everyday life, a person will not be affecting large numbers of other people, and thus need not consider his or her actions in relation to the good of all, but only to the good of those involved. It is only the people who work in the public sphere and affect many other people who must think about public utility on a regular basis (Spark Notes,
There were some moral problems that Mill ran into with his principle. One of the first problems was that actions are right to promote happiness, but wrong as they sometimes tend to produce unhappiness. By moving a victim from a mangled car would be the noble thing to do but what if pulling him from the wreck meant killing him. He intended to produce a happy outcome, but in the end he created an unhappy situation. Utilitarianism declares that men can live just as well without happiness. Mill says yes, but men do not conduct their lives, always seeking happiness. Happiness does not always mean total bliss.
The Utilitarianism is the theory which fund the morality on the utility, and affirms that the true utilitity for and individual can't not always get along with the general utility. The utilitarianism fixes as a starting point the thought which recognize that one of the condition of human nature is to think firstly about his own interests: the morality consists in recognize that the utile of the single coincide with the utile of the others. Historically the Utilitarianism found himself in the English philosophy. The term ''utilitarianism'' was used for the first time by J. Bentham, and with that he designed the fundamental character of his own philosophic system. Bentham affirms also the need of all the utilitarian philosophies to create the ethic as an exact science: a rigorous calculus on the quantitative difference of the pleasures. The Utilitarianism broaden also in the juridical and political field, with the proposition of radical reforms. It was then the ce...
Throughout the essay, Mills speaks highly of utilitarianism as a way to construct a happier more stable society. “The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness” (Mill 137). The ideas of such political philosophers such as Mills and Bentham enticed the modern world at the time of their publication, including the people of the U.S. The concept of utilitarianism started shaping America many years ago, and it is important to realize its consequence in modern day
John Stuart Mill’s theory of Utilitarianism is a moral consequentialist view that maintains actions are good if they lead to happiness and bad if they lead to suffering. The same rationale can be applied to obstruction—whatever prevents suffering is morally good, and whatever prevents happiness is morally bad. It should be noted Mill characterizes happiness as “pleasure and the absence of pain” (104). He also puts forth that intellectual pleasures—such as the satisfaction that comes with finishing a paper, or having a successful long-term friendship—are better than the animalistic pleasures taken in eating or sex. Proponents of this moral theory believe the most moral action is one that maximizes total happiness for the greatest amount of people.
I have considered Mill’s ethical theory of Utilitarianism, specifically Rule Utilitarianism. After considering the objections of Negative Responsibility and conflicting rules, I have explained that it is plausible that an individual has a moral responsibility to only really focus on their own happiness and the happiness of those around them. I have also explained that it is fairly trivial to solve the issue of conflicting rules by pondering modifications of rules or even new ones. I’ve explained Mill’s response to the “no time” objection, given his views on lying. I’ve given the definitions of happiness, unhappiness, qualities of pleasure and the role of competent judges in that, and the Greatest Happiness Principle.
Mill’s Utilitarianism varies from the most general form of utilitarianism, which claims that one should assess persons, actions, and institutions by how well they promote humans’ happiness. Mill branches off of this basic explanation by interpreting the misconceptions of utilitarianism into utility. This utility is something in opposition to pleasure. In order words, mill utilitarianism utility is the greatest happiness principle.
In the debate with the critics of utilitarianism Mill clarifies the principle of utility, which implies general happiness. General happiness requires no...
John Stuart Mill suggests that a person’s ethical decision-making process should be based solely upon the amount of happiness that the person can receive. Although Mill fully justifies himself, his approach lacks certain criteria for which happiness can be considered. Happiness should be judged, not only by pleasure, but by pain as well. This paper will examine Mill’s position on happiness, and the reasoning behind it. Showing where there are agreements and where there are disagreements will critique the theory of Utilitarianism. By showing the problems that the theory have will reveal what should make up ethical decision-making. John Stuart Mill supports and explains his reasoning in his book, Utilitarianism. Mill illustrates the guidelines of his theory. Mill defines utilitarianism as the quest for happiness. His main point is that one should guide his or her judgements by what will give pleasure. Mill believes that a person should always seek to gain pleasure and reject pain. Utilitarianism also states that the actions of a person should be based upon the “greatest happiness principle”. This principle states that ethical actions command the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Mill further explores the need for pleasure by noting “a being of higher faculties requires more to make him happy.” . He acknowledges that some pleasures are more alluring than others are. He adds to this by making known that when placing value in things to calculate pleasure, not only quantity important but quality as well. Mill’s criteria for happiness is easily understood, some statements that he gives are questionable. John Stuart Mill plainly laid out what he believes that the basis for ethical decision-making. First, the pursuit of pleasure is directly related to happiness. This idea can be easily accepted. It is natural for a person to focus his goals on things that will bring him pleasure. It would be absurd if someone’s goal in life was to be poor and starving. This being said, it does not mean that people are only happy due wealth but that no one’s goals are focused on poverty. Although there are many issues that can be agreeable with Mill, there are problems that exist with his theory of utilitarianism.
Mill understands the Utilitarian principle to the full of it 's extent, he also understands why a person would disregard the theory, and there goes on to unravel the seemingly missing puzzle pieces to connect the theory completely, and correctly. His argurment reflects that of his own thoughts and opinions on the philosophy of the overall good of the population, concerning what is considered good by the measurement of happiness and pleasure. This in turn is where the second term for Utilitarianims comes from, as it is call the Greatest Happiness Principle. In his text, Mr. Mill states that this principle "holds that actiosn are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness" (96). Following this idea, he explains that happiness holds the absence of pain and the reverse of that, there holds the "privation of pleasure" (Mill 96). John Mill says that this is exactly what happiness and pleasure consist of. What is considered controversial on this particular theory is the simplicty of the definind words. The greatest happiness principle concerns happiness and pleasure, to the simple or closed minded this sounds degrading to humans or anyone who believes in it. John Mill argues for this principle and against the simple minded people that would judge the Epicureans for practicing
...ry. Some may reject it and have the objection that utilitarianism does not provide an effective way of life. Those who object may say that this moral theory is not good or specific enough, lacks a mention of full human potential and capabilities, and fails to address the special moral values of humans. Mill provides an effective response to those who doubt utilitarianism, and states that there is only one end (happiness) that humans aim for and that humans and humans alone are the only ones who can judge and experience all pleasures and qualities of life.
Mill claims that happiness is the ultimate good and the ultimate end of human being. According to me human being is applying this principle in his everyday life. By trying to attain our own happiness, we deal with situations where the happiness of others has to been taken into account. Thus, by applying the “rule utilitarianism” and taking into examples the previous situations others may have face, we can really improve our life and may be find a basis for the foundation of morality.
Mill begins his essay on Utilitarianism by explaining his Greatest Happiness Principle, stating actions are right in that they promote happiness and actions are wrong if they take happiness away (Mill, “What Utilitarianism Is,” para 2). Following from this idea, happiness is pleasure, and unhappiness is pain and the privation of pleasure (Mill, “What Utilitarianism Is,” para 2). In defending the equivalence between happiness and pleasure from his critics, Mill makes the claim that there is “the superiority of mental over bodily pleasures chiefly in the greater permanency, safety, uncostliness, etc., of the former” (Mill, “What Utilitarianism Is,” para 4). He claims that pleasures can differ both in quality and qua...
Utilitarianism is a theory aimed at defining one simple basis that can be applied when making any ethical decision. It is based on a human’s natural instinct to seek pleasure and avoid pain.
Mill’s utilitarianism does not include happiness of a person, which results in a general decrease in the happiness of society as a whole. Therefore, an action can be labeled as right if it promotes the general happiness of a society and wrong if it reverses the happiness of a society. What brings about happiness is pleasure, and what reverses happiness is pain. The value of different pleasures is also a point of interest for Mill. Mill’s version of utilitarianism requires a comparison between different types of pleasures.
John Stuart Mill, in his Utilitarianism, turns morality into a practical problem. His moral theory is designed to help one evaluate his moral principles and senisibilites and be able to ajudicate conflictions in moral conflicts. Mill postulates that actions are right so far as they tend to promote happiness and minimize pain. This theory manifests itself as an impartial promotion of happiness. Morally "right" actions are ones which promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number number of people and reduce pain. Utilitarian moral theories need to be coupled with theories of well-being, so that we can point to what is being maximized through the moral theory's operation. Mill's moral theory is no different. Three theories of well-being must be considered, one of which fits Mill's moral theory most appropriately. Experientialism, or hedonism, is a theory of well-being that advocates an unwavering pursuit of pleasure through desireable experiences. The theory is a mental state account which stipulates that a person's life is going well insofar as they are having pleasurable experiences and what Experientialist call "desireable consciousness." We strive to have experiences in which we can arrive at the mental state of "desireable consciousness." The Desire Theory postulates that a person's life is going well to the extent that his desires are fulfilled, regardless of the content of those desires. There is no hierarchy of desires in this account; Desire Theorists see no difference between a desire to throw a piece of trash into a wastebasket yards away and desire to win the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. Lastly is the Substantive Goods Theory which, when compared with the requirements and goa...