Evaluating Mill's Theory Of Morality

In this paper, I will argue that Mill’s theory of morality does not withstand the philosophical reasoning; therefore, making his theory invalid. I will do so by first stating a brief synopsis of Mill’s theory and then provide two objections that go against his approach. Once I have given the two objections, I will discuss the response Mill gives for each of these objections. Finally, I will give a critical evaluation of Mill’s theory of Utilitarianism as well as give supporting evidence as to why Mill’s approach is philosophically sound.
Utilitarianism is a consequentialist moral theory that states that the consequences of a person’s actions are deemed good or bad depending on how much happiness was produced as an outcome. If stuck between
Let’s evaluate Mill’s theory of utilitarianism to ensure it is credible. Some reasons that Mill’s theory is evidently a respectable understanding of morality would be the two-part argument for the principle of utility along with why happiness is the only ultimate end. The first part of the argument for the principle of utility would be examples of the audibility of a sound being a fact that people can hear it, the visibility of an object provides a fact that people can see it, people prove the desirability of an object by desiring that object. This in turn shows that people desire to be happy therefore happiness becomes the ultimate end. The second part of this argument would be that every individual desire to be happy. Which concludes that overall happiness is good to a society. However, this argument is not very strong due the fact that it is not possible to prove since it is just an ultimate truth. Mill believes that happiness is the only ultimate end. It is supported by demonstrating that everything that we value, we value because of one of two things. It is either because it is a part of our perception of happiness meaning people cannot imagine missing righteousness and still being able to maintain happiness or it is only instrumentally valued and leads to happiness for that reason. What Mill means is that happiness is at least one of the precedents that make up morality. Ultimately Mill leaves it up to the reader to decide whether
The two objections that were discussed were the standard too high and burdensome objections but Mill had responded to both critically with ease. He states for the standard too high that this is a motive and if people take care of themselves and loved ones this objection is invalid. Mill responds to the burdensome objection by stating that we should use the rules of thumb instead of calculating each action we do. I believe that Mill’s theory is practical because throughout society everyone desires and strives to be happy. It is as Mill’s proposes that happiness is the only ultimate