“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” (11). That quote is from “Utilitarianism” written by John Stuart Mill. Mill is noted in history as a man who pushed for radical change of social and legal principles using Utilitarianism as his guide. That quote sums up his belief in that theory. In this essay I will be discussing Mill, the theory of Utilitarianism and how that theory relates to contemporary ethical issues.…
1. Utilitarianism is moral theory that tries to lay a set of rules that you should follow to achieve the most good or pleasure from any one act. Two popular proponents of this systems are philosophers by the name of Jeremy Bentham and James Mill. They both have different ideas for how one should go about the use of utilitarianism to achieve the greatest happiness. Bentham's approach is often called quantitative utilitarianism in which Bentham came up with an idea called the felicific calculus which is a way one can measure the level of happiness that can come out of one certain decision. For Bentham pleasure is countable and tangible, by this I mean that pleasure can be used as sort of a measuring system for what should be morally right or wrong. Now on the other hand James Mill takes a different view of utilitarianism in which he allows for so called greater pleasure. Meaning that even though the decision that the felicific calculus tells you to make may not be the most pleasurable because some decisions have the potential to grow overtime into a more rewarding pleasure. This is where Mills is commonly referred to as a qualitative utilitarianism because he differentiates between the qualities of the pleasures you can choose. This greater pleasure idea, though, also raises a few questions in such that is it really that the decision is a so called greater pleasure or is it that you choose such decision because of the opportunity to create more pleasure. It seems as though pleasure is still the end result when you make this decision it is just that you have the opportunity to fail or be successful in this decisions which is not really consistent with the idea of pleasure but more so of opportunity.…
Throughout history competition has created bitter tension between social classes. Competition has occurred in every social structure that has existed to this day. Social structure has been the determining factor of competition: in essence the poorer classes have always tried to compete with the wealthier classes to seize their wealth and power; the greater the economical gap between the two opposing classes the fiercer the competition between them. Two highly esteemed and different people, Karl Marx and Andrew Carnegie, developed their own ideologies to resolve and ease class tension, that is, whether changes should be imposed on the structure and role of social classes. Another writer, Sam Keen illustrates the effect of competition in the extreme. Within their opposing and controversial views, there lies the more efficient social-economic resolution: a modified version of Carnegie's argument, despite the fact that it has some imperfections. The answer is determined by the acknowledgment by the powerful and the wealthy of certain responsibilities to the poorer classes. Each author feels that the competition within a capitalist society has definite effects on social structure but disagree as to what this effect is.…
I believe the theory which makes most sense is Jeremy Bentham’s theory of the hedonic calculus. However due to many decisions and actions having to be made in a matter of seconds, I can’t see it being practical in everyday life. The process of the hedonic calculus can take a matter of hours let alone minuets, and by following the process step-by step the decision that had to be made may have already passed. In relation to John mills theory of maximum pleasure and minimal pain, I strongly disagree that this is the correct answer for many ethical situations. Everyone’s pleasures are different and individual, for you to make a decision this can become a hindrance as it’s hard to define how to receive the maximum happiness from every individual. Using this theory in just a situation when it’s just your happiness involved however is a simple process, as you will know your preferences and what makes you happy. However when using this theory in a situation with more than one person it becomes a very complicated situation.…
After discussing the first argument, I will now concentrate on the second critic views utilitarianism definition by Mill as insufficient mainly because of diverting the focus from the desired nature of pleasure to desirable aspect. According to this critic, the good actions are viewed as desirable that is thought to be wrong. However, this claim is insufficient in showing the weakness of utilitarianism. I defend utilitarianism against this claim because an individual must desire something for the same to become a pleasurable…
Stuart Mill and Karl Marx each had their own reasons for what makes the world unjust. Mill thought that it was unjust to deprive anyone of personal liberty, property and other things which belong by law. He also thought that it was unjust to deprive anyone of their own happiness. Marx on the other hand believed that property, classes, competition, and inequality all made the world an unjust place. He thought that these things separated the people and didn't allow people to reach their full potential and happiness. In order to make the world more just Marx believed that we needed to change these things, he created ten different proposals to create a change in our world. He believed that…
Within the context of the utilitarian theory, a utilitarian would evaluate all acts based on whether, as quoted from John Stuart Mill, “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. ” In other words, maximizing happiness is the fundamental moral principle of a utilitarian as a utilitarian will evaluate all acts of its rightness or wrongness based on whether it maximizes happiness and not by any other yardstick.…
The concepts of pleasure and happiness are integral pieces of the human experience, and have been discussed in depth by philosophies seeking to understand human behavior. What one defines as ‘pleasurable’ determines the very fabric of their existence; how people decide to live is based largely on what they enjoy. Consequently, traditions such as Shirttails form based upon the pleasures which communities deem valuable. In Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill argues for the existence of ‘higher’ and ‘lower’ pleasures, intrinsically separated by value and accessibility (Mill 1863). Examples of John Stuart Mill’s ‘higher’ pleasures include the technical enjoyment of opera or the intellectual stimulation garnered during debate (Mill 1863).…
1. Describe the working and living conditions encountered by men, women and children during the industrial revolution.…
Utilitarianism, or the “Greatest Happiness Principle”, is an ethical system that is heavily focused on by John Stuart Mill in his essay appropriately titled, “Utilitarianism”. In the essay, Mill adequately lays out the curriculum for utilitarianism and explains that the actions of being in the right are directly proportional to how much happiness is produced, and the actions of being in the wrong are directly proportional to how much they produce the reverse of happiness (Mill). Happiness produces pleasure while the reverse of happiness produces pain. Therefore, the presence of pleasure and the absence of pain are the only things inherently good (Mill). This ethical system defines “the good” by the explanations laid out previously: “the good” is anything that promotes pleasure and the…
Meaning that those actions which present the greater pleasure as their results rather than pain are more ethically acceptable and for a fact that, rightness and wrongness of an act solely imply to the satisfaction of individual desire generated in the consequences of doing the act that is the most pleasurable. In sum, according to Mill, the quality of pleasure, owe to the consequences of the act needs to be evaluated by the rightness and wrongness of the given actions and rules, for the reason that moral duties are more of an instrumental act and not…
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that assesses an action as morally right and just if it produces the most amount of net happiness. There are two forms of utilitarianism: act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism is the standard form, which considers all paths of the action that lead to immediate and long-term happiness, as well has the magnitude and how long the happiness will last. Furthermore, if all paths lead to the same amount of net happiness, each path would be just as morally right as the other. It also does not take into account the number of people it affects – it only considers the amount of happiness. To English philosopher Jeremy Bentham, the founder of utilitarianism, happiness is pleasure and the absence of pain. He believed that all types of pleasure, if the in same amount, were also equal in quality. However, it is difficult to calculate an amount of happiness. Is the amount of happiness one receives from getting a promotion at McDonald’s the same as happiness one gets from graduating law school? So, John Stuart Mill, fellow philosopher and follower of Bentham’s utilitarian theory, believed that different pleasures have different values. To Mill, physical pleasures are valued less than pleasure that invigorate the mind. Thus, in the McDonald’s promotion and law school degree scenarios, Bentham would argue that they would each render the same amount of happiness, whereas Mill would argue that receiving a degree from law school would render more happiness because it would bring out more possibilities for a career and ultimately increase one’s well-being. In addition to bringing out the most happiness, the utilitarian theory also recognizes that all the possibilities of an action may not bring any net happiness. In these instances, the theory guides one to choose the action that would produce the least amount of unhappiness.…
One of John Stewart Mill’s focuses in his book Utilitarianism, is that utilitarianism has all the sanctions of other moral systems. Events or excuses that people accept as permission to continue with a choice. These sanctions derive from a wide spectrum of different approvals, usually built upon moral preference. Mill is able to categorize every human license into exist internal and external sanctions, and believes that it is possible to change your moral selection.…
Utilitarianism states that “an act is only right if it causes the greatest happiness in the greatest number.” In his essay Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill added a qualitative component to this mathematically driven theory. Mill created a distinction between higher, intellectual pleasures and lower, bodily pleasures. Mill stated that some pleasures are of a higher quality, and therefore are worth more. Additionally he stated that no quantity of a lower pleasure could achieve the same quality as a higher one. Finally, Mill proposed that the “competent judge” of pleasure is someone who has experienced both pleasures and would always prefer one over the other (chapter 2, paragraph 5). In this paper, I will explain advantages and my criticisms…
This article discusses utilitarian ethical theory. For a discussion of John Stuart Mill's essay Utilitarianism (1861), see Utilitarianism (book).…