John Stuart Mill On Utilitarianism

John Stuart Mill wrote an essay that provide support for the value of utilitarianism as a moral theory. He states. John Mill defines happiness as pleasure with the absence of pain. Though he agrees that pleasure can be different in quality with quantity, pleasure are rooted in one’s higher faculties would be weighted more heavily than baser pleasures. Furthermore, he agree that people’s achievement of their goals along with their ends, would be such a virtuous living, and would be counted as a part of their happiness. Though he also attempt reply to the misconceptions about utilitarianism, and thereby delineate the theory. People can misunderstand utilitarianism by interpreting utility as an opposition to pleasure. Utility and pleasure is defined

Furthermore, can someone exist without happiness, and virtuous people become virtuous by giving up happiness. Though it is an exaggeration to say someone can live without happiness. Happiness can be defined as moments of joy occurring at the same time as crippling pain, it is indeed possible, for almost anybody if educational and social arrangement were to different. Preference utilitarianism is the good that preferences (wants, desires) of sentient beings would be satisfied with, to the greatest possible extent. It is to act to further the preferences of those affected. The three foundational principles of Classical Utilitarianism, is the morality of an action a person make solely on its resulting consequences( along with those consequences) they matter if they involved a greater or lesser happiness of individuals. Each person happiness has been given equal consideration while, an action is right if it produces the greatest balance of happiness and unhappiness. Act utilitarianism is where each act is judged by whether it has the best consequences while; rule utilitarianism is where each act is judge by whether it falls under some moral universal rule. The weakness of utilitarianism are its hard to formulate consequences accurately, it does not consider motive or any moral factors, it could oppress an individual to always benefit the mass

Scapegoat refers to the act of blame being laid or assigning it to one person but in a variation has suffering being laid upon the child. Children serves a vital role in society, as his or her misery makes life possible in the city. This serves as utilitarianism because in order to make the mass majority happy the make the children miserable. Children along with the rest of the citizen represent the sharp contrast between the wealthy and the poor the in capitalist society. The positive effects of utilitarianism is the result of the mass majority being happy. While, the negative effect of utilitarianism is that it condone the act of slavery because it made the mass majority happy. Yes I would leave Omelas because in the story it seem that in order to have the most you must forsake the children. No, I we do not live in a world of Omelas, because most of the people are contempt without making others miserable. In a certain ways our happiness predicated on the suffering of poorer nations because we trade with Mexico or any other nation for a profit by exploiting cheap labor from the disadvantaged