Research Paper On John Stuart Mill Utilitarianism

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.
The hungry children need the money more than I need the money to buying new designer clothes. If the hungry children are given

food, then it reduces their suffering. According to 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.

By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure” (82, John Stuart Mill). The Greatest Happiness Principle said that happiness if pleasure and the absence of pain are the only desirable things that are “inherently good” or “moral inherently”. John Stuart Mill argues that engagements are principled when they indication to a higher level of happiness, and not corrupted when they tend to lend to a lower level of happiness. According to John Stuart Mill, anything is desirable as it is a source of for such pleasure. John Stuart Mill believes that “life has (as they express it) no higher end than pleasure” (82, John Stuart Mill). According to John Stuart Mill, buying the food for the children will bring me much higher

level of happiness. The children will get the food and end their suffering leading to a higher level of happiness for both me and the children. If I buy the Coach Bag or Armani Exchange outfit at the Nordstrom downtown, then I would have lower level of happiness because it is an item which I do not need to acquire. By donating half the money to the hungry children happiness is accomplished since according to Mill, happiness is accomplished with the absence of pain. If I donate the money to the children I will not feel the pain to know that they are starving. Therefore, I am happy and have a higher level of happiness.
When a person is making a moral decision utilitarianism, they need to take account the quality and the quantity of the pleasure that has a resulting from it. John Stuart Mill describes the differences between higher and lower pleasure in quality. John Stuart Mill states that some types of pleasure are more important and more valuable than other. According to John Stuart Mill, a pleasure is higher if people selected it over another pleasure, even if it is followed with unpleasantness, and the person would not swap it for another pleasure and even if it is better. John Stuarts Mill explains that it is an unquestionable fact that if people are given a choice between the two, they would prefer the one that has higher faculties. Higher pleasures are more valuable than lower pleasures. People need higher pleasures more than lower pleasures. According to utilitarianism, the idea is for the society to set instructions that maximum higher pleasure. Purchasing the clothes is an example lower pleasure because they do not give something that is needed. Also, by donating the money that is a higher pleasure because likes intellectual pleasure (Reading a book that makes a person question how our society works and the world and having a higher pleasure). A lower pleasure is a pleasure that does not have a great impact on society or is immoral (A lower pleasure would be watching a comedy movie or playing video games.). John Stuart Mill argues that intellectual and moral pleasures are more important. It is a way to reach an agreement what is the best and moral decision, so the moral decision which be to donate the money. Also, I will have learned something about this experience; by feeding the children, then I am given the opportunity to save a couple of lives or stop their suffering. If I donate the money then I would save a life giving me a higher pleasure. By buying the clothes that would be a lower pleasure because I would be happy for a little and not learn anything about the world. Feeding the children has a greater and bigger importance then me purchasing the Coach Handbag and Armani Exchange outfit. In addition, according to John Stuart Mill feeding the children is a higher pleasure in quality than purchasing the designer items.
If I decide to donate the money to the hungry children, then that's has a great benefit to the society.

By donating the money I have a bigger impact on the world. If I buy the clothes then I do not have that great of an impact on the world. John Stuart Mill sates that people are capable of picking the higher pleasure, but are influenced of temptation by the lower pleasure but they know which one is the least valuable. The person is perfectly aware that by donating the money to hungry children that is the higher pleasure but they are encouraged by the lower pleasure, so they end up picking the lower pleasure, which they buying new clothes does not have a impact or important impact on society. Learning how to pick the best optional would get the person a higher level of happiness or pleasure in that matter. Trying to figure out which one is the higher pleasure and lower pleasure for society. By picking the lower pleasure they are incapable of picking the other optional. “... being the preference felt by those who, in their opportunities of experience, to which must be added their habits of self-consciousness and self-observation, are best furnished with the means of comparison.” (84, John Stuart Mill ). People who engage higher faculties are often less satisfied, because they have a wider sense of the boundaries of the world. John Stuart Mill argues that people tend to go for lower pleasures do not have experience with higher pleasure, so they will pick the lower pleasure

since they have always understood the world that way. The person is not a proper position to judge what has a better or bigger impact in the world is. Buying food for the hungry children has a bigger impact on the world, and I still have money left to buy the knock-off at target.
If I was given three hundred dollars for my birthday to spend on Coach Bag or Armani Exchange outfit or 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. I would choose to donate half of the money to the hungry children because the greatest happiness Principle that said that the children need the money more than I do to buy designer clothes. 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. The Greatest Happiness Principle states that happiness is pleasure and the absence of pain. If I donate the money I would have a higher level of happiness for myself and the children. Donating half the money to the hungry children a bigger impact on the world and making me see the different options.