John Stuart Mill's Utilitarian Theory

806 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Utilitarianism john stuart mill 1961

John Stuart Mill believes in the utilitarian principle that no action in of itself is good or bad, but the consequences of the action. People who believe in the utilitarian principle agrees that the way to judge an action’s morality is by seeing if it promotes the greatness amount of happiness, or pleasure, to the greatest amount of people. Based on that belief, Mill thinks that the only possible standard to judge ethics is happiness. Every action that we take, whether it be for short-term pleasure (lower-order pleasures) or if it’s for long term pleasure (higher-order pleasures), the tail end result for doing anything in this lifetime is to be truly happy. He also believes that happiness is the only thing that can be universally, in terms …show more content…

Another example of this, is the story of Robin Hood. Robin Hood tells the tale of a man that steals from the rich and gives on to the poor. In this case, utilitarians would find nothing wrong with this man stealing money from people, because we don’t give actions their own morality, only thing that makes an action good or bad is the consequences that proceed them. So, this is morally acceptable based on that standard because the consequences are relatively good because the greatest amount of happiness is being promoted to the greatest number of people. Stealing from one person to feed a whole village or maybe even two is the right thing to do morally, no matter the means in which he achieved …show more content…

The theory of utilitarianism is unrealistic because it asks you to consider the happiness of everyone before every action. Any action can negatively affect someone, the consequences may not show immediately, but they could happen further into the future. There is no way to consider every person’s happiness in making everyday decisions. Even though Mill responds to this objection by saying just concentrate locally and it would create a trickle-down effect in the ideal situation, it still wouldn’t work simply because it’s no way of knowing if the people you help will pay it forward and continue to help other

Show More
Related

  • John Stuart Mill Vs Kierkegaard Essay

    1200 Words  | 3 Pages

    Mill grew up under the influences from his father and Bentham. In his twenties, an indication of the cerebral approach of the early Utilitarians led to Mill’s nervous breakdown. He was influential in the growth of the moral theory of Utilitarianism whose goal was to maximize the personal freedom and happiness of every individual. Mill's principle of utility is that “actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness”. Utilitarianism is the concept that a man should judge everything based on the ability to promote happiness for the greatest number of individual. He believes that Utilitarianism must show how the conversion can be made from an interest in one’s own particular bliss to that of others. John Stuart Mill also states that moral action should not be judged on the individual case but more along the lines of “rule of thumb” and says that individuals ought to measure the outcomes and settle on their choices in view of the consequence and result that advantages the most people. Mill believes that pleasure is the only wanted consequence. Mill supposes that people are gifted with the capacity for conscious thought, and they are not happy with physical delights, but rather endeavor to accomplish the joy of the psyche too. He asserts that individuals want pleasure and reject

    Read More

  • What Is Mill's Principle Of Utility

    89 Words  | 1 Pages

    The principle of utility states that actions or behaviors are right in so far as they promote happiness or pleasure, wrong if they tend to deliver despondency or torment. Mill believes that the principle of utility is the perfect way to evaluate ethics is through the individual's happiness. People who have the opportunity to chose or purse there own form of happiness usually makes really wise ethical decisions, which improves society. I agree with mill’s theory because happiness always produces good things, which would very beneficial to the

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism and Morality in John Stuart Mill´s Essay

    1012 Words  | 3 Pages

    For more than two thousand years, the human race has struggled to effectively establish the basis of morality. Society has made little progress distinguishing between morally right and wrong. Even the most intellectual minds fail to distinguish the underlying principles of morality. A consensus on morality is far from being reached. The struggle to create a basis has created a vigorous warfare, bursting with disagreement and disputation. Despite the lack of understanding, John Stuart Mill confidently believes that truths can still have meaning even if society struggles to understand its principles. Mill does an outstanding job at depicting morality and for that the entire essay is a masterpiece. His claims throughout the essay could not be any closer to the truth.

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill and Utilitarianism

    1321 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • The Utilitarian Views Of John Stuart Mill And Philippa Foot's To Kill Or Let Live

    1080 Words  | 3 Pages

    To kill or let live will explore the utilitarian views of John Stuart Mill, as well as the deontological views of Immanuel Kant on the thought experiment derived from British Philosopher Philippa Foot. Foot had great influence in the advancement of the naturalistic point of view of moral philosophy. The exploration of Philippa Foot’s Rescue I and Rescue II scenarios will provide the different views on moral philosophy through the eyes of John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant.

    Read More

  • A Comparison of John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant's Ethical Theories

    3195 Words  | 7 Pages

    Mill made a distinction between happiness and sheer sensual pleasure. He defines happiness in terms of higher order pleasure (i.e. social enjoyments, intellectual). In his Utilitarianism (1861), Mill described this principle as follows:According to the Greatest Happiness Principle … The ultimate end, end, with reference to and for the sake of which all other things are desirable (whether we are considering our own good or that of other people), is an existence exempt as far as possible from pain, and as rich as possible enjoyments.Therefore, based on this statement, three ideas may be identified: (1) The goodness of an act may be determined by the consequences of that act. (2) Consequences are determined by the amount of happiness or unhappiness caused. (3) A "good" man is one who considers the other man's pleasure (or pain) as equally as his own.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism In John Stuart Mill

    1161 Words  | 3 Pages

    In utilitarianism the common goal is to create the most happiness for the most amount of people. Mills definition of the Greatest Happiness Principle “holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (540) If this principle is the case then as a utilitarian your actions of good should promote the most happiness. This way of thinking can really produce some wrong answers and actions to moral questions. For example, say you and your family are starving and in need of food. The only possible way to get food would be to steal it. In general society finds it morally wrong to steal under any circumstances. But as utilitarian you have to ask, would my actions of stealing food promote the most happiness for the most people. You need to take into account the people you are making happy and the people you are hurting. On one hand, you would be promoting happiness for you and your and entire family, and on the other hand, you would be hurting the storeowner by stealing some of his revenue. Utilitarian ideas tell you that you should steal the food because your actions are promoting happiness and the absence of pain for the least amount of people. There are other examples I found when doing some research like doctors going against morals to save more sick people by letting one healthy person die

    Read More

  • Mill's Utilitarianism

    984 Words  | 2 Pages

    The main principle of utilitarianism is the greatest happiness principle. It states that, "actions are right in proportion 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 unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure" (Mill, 1863, Ch. 2, p330). In other words, it results with the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people that are involved.

    Read More

  • Jeremy Bentham : Father of Utilitarianism

    1451 Words  | 3 Pages

    Utilitarianism is a reality, not just a theory like many other philosophies; it is practiced every day, for instance the vote system. This ongoing practice of utilitarianism in society has show that it is flawed. Just because the masses vote for something, doesn’t make it right. The masses can be fooled, as in Nazi Germany for example, thousands of people were behind Hitler even though his actions were undeniably evil. Utilitarianism is a logical system, but it requires some sort of basic, firm rules to prevent such gross injustices, violations of human rights, and just obviously wrong thing ever being allowed. This could be the ‘harm principle’ which Mill devised.

    Read More

  • Mill's Utilitarianism

    554 Words  | 2 Pages

    Mill, in the chapter labeled “Of What Sort of Proof the Principle of Utility Is Susceptible”, postulates that utilitarianism does not preclude a pursuit of virtue, but rather that a desire for virtue sprouts from a desire for happiness. Mill likens the aspiration for virtue to the pursuit of money: many desire money for money’s sake, because they have grown to associate the happiness acquired by money with money itself. Likewise, Mill puts forward the idea that people grow to associate virtue with the consequential happiness, and thus pursue virtue as an end in and of itself, instead of merely a means to the end of happiness. This argument is vital to Mill’s assertion that the only true end is happiness, while everything else is “only desirable as a means to that end.” However, one need only find an example of a pursuit of virtue for a sake other than happiness to disprove both the assertion that virtue is desired only due to its association with happiness and the assertion that happiness is the only desirable end.

    Read More

  • Research Paper On John Stuart Mill Utilitarianism

    1283 Words  | 3 Pages

    Utilitarianism is the moral beliefs than an achievement is right if the outcome is greatest for most people. I was given three hundred dollars for my birthday; I would donate a portion of the money to hungry children for potential food and still have money left for the Coach Bag or Armani Exchange outfit knock-offs at Target then the real things at the Nordstrom downtown. I would donate the money because the greatest happiness Principle said the children need more than I do. Also, if I decision to donate the money to the hungry children, then that has a higher level of happiness and has a bigger impact on the world.

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill Utilitarianism

    407 Words  | 1 Pages

    that if one believes that God is truly good, then God’s main criterion for morality

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism

    210 Words  | 1 Pages

    Mill thinks Utilitarianism is based on a theory about a principle of “actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” He believes happiness is pleasure and the absence of pain. I think Peter Singer does not think that our distance from an evil should alter our decision whether we help those people suffering evil. He made an example about walking past a shallow pond and seeing a child drowning, and saying he ought to pull the child out. There is no moral difference pulling the child out if it were a neighbors child, and there is no distinction between cases that he is the only person that could do anything. He makes a claim that the fact that the person is physically

    Read More

  • The Greatest Happiness Principle Analysis

    1485 Words  | 3 Pages

    Mill’s critics would likely say that Utilitarianism as a whole can function to create selfish people because all are striving towards a life of more pleasure than pain, but Mill shuts this down with the idea of happiness being impartial. Basically, a person must choose an action that yields the most happiness or pleasure, whether that pleasure is for them or not. Mill would recognize that, “Among the qualitatively superior ends are the moral ends, and it is in this that people acquire the sense that they have moral intuitions superior to mere self-interest” (Wilson). By this, it is meant that although people are supposed to take action that will produce the greatest pleasure, the do not do so in a purely selfish manner. Mill goes on to argue that the happiness of individuals is interconnected; therefore one cannot be selfish in such a way. Along with the criticism of Utilitarianism and the principle of utility being selfish, many argue that such a doctrine promotes expediency in order to benefit the person conducting the action alone. I would disagree with these criticisms, and find Mill’s argument valid. His argument counters

    Read More

  • Principle Of Utility Essay

    892 Words  | 2 Pages

    The principle of Utility is considered as the “greatest happiness principle”. Mill defines this principle as actions are right if they tend to promote the most happiness and wrong if they tend to produce the reverse of happiness (Utilitarianism, 7). There have been many arguments against the principle of utility. People who are against this principle argue that there is no time to calculate what generates the most happiness in a given situation. Mills responds to this objection by explaining how secondary moral reasoning and the fundamental principle of morality are taken into account when deciding what promotes the most overall happiness. After explaining his argument, I believe Mill succeeds in responding to the objection, he explains why it shouldn’t be a problem when weighing the best possible outcome by using the secondary moral rule as the first principle.

    Read More

More about John Stuart Mill's Utilitarian Theory

Open Document