I am going to argue that Jeremy Bentham would choose the life of an oyster over the life of Joseph Haydn, and John Stuart Mill would choose the life of Joseph Haydn. This question comes from the hypothetical situation by Roger Crisp where an angel asks you which life you would rather become, one of a successful composer or an oyster who will live forever and whose only experience is the feeling of “floating very drunk in a warm bath”(23). After explaining Bentham and Mill’s reasons for choosing these very different lives, I will explain my reasons as to why I feel Bentham is over looking the idea of pleasure through religion which can be distinguished between the pleasure of eating a piece of cake, not only in quantity of pleasure but in quality. …show more content…
And what makes Bentham a quantitative hedonist is that he believes each experience has a certain amount of pleasure allotted to it and those amounts can be compared across the board. Bentham does not feel any pleasures are greater than another. Just as he feels the pleasures of one person are greater than the next. Everyone and every pleasure are equal in the eyes of Bentham. Bentham bases his decisions off of the Principle of Utility, which is the foundation that you should act in the way that produces the most amount of pleasure for the most amount of people. When faced with the decision of choosing the life of the oyster versus the life of Haydn it is simple for Bentham. Because all pleasures are the same between the oyster and the human, Bentham would choose the life of the oyster. Bentham distinguishes the quantitative values of pleasures based on seven circumstances: intensity, duration, certainty or uncertainty, propinquity or remoteness, fecundity, purity, and extent. Although the intensity of the …show more content…
Mill believes that there are higher and lower pleasures. Higher pleasures are intellectual and sophisticated pleasures, while lower pleasures are simple and mundane. More often than not, Mill considers higher pleasures to be thought provoking to the mind, while lower pleasures rely on only physical sensations or experiences. Mill also believes that there are some types of pleasures that cannot be compared to each other. One cannot compare apples to oranges. Mill proves his argument by providing an example that disregards quantity to illuminate the quality differences among pleasures. For this example, the higher pleasure is music while the lower pleasure is candy. When given the opportunity of a life without music, but you have unlimited candy or a life without candy, but you have music, you are more often than not going to chose the life with music. Mill uses this example to demonstrate how clearly there is a difference in quality among these pleasures. The difference of quality among pleasures is so important to Mill that he states it “is better to be a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied”(6). With that being said, Mill would most definitely choose the life of Joseph Haydn. Not only as a successful composer but simply as a human being, Mill feels the
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
Mill's moral theory is not accurately described. It remains recognizably utilitarian. According to Skorupski, he believes that the “mental, moral, and aesthetic stature”4 is capable for human nature, according to Mill. Utility has a place when Mill states that the greatest of interests is not normally classed “under the head of interest.” 5
The second classic criticism of Utilitarian Principle is that Mill’s dichotomy of higher and lower pleasures create the need to calculate the happiness derived from each category of pleasures. This has left critics asking “Is a dissatisfied Socrates better off than a satisfied fool?” In response, Mill says that people learn to distinguish physical (or lower) pleasures from mental (or higher) pleasures with training. We possess the tendency to favor the higher pleasures, as we are human beings rather than mere
With any form of hedonism, one is committed to the concept that pleasure is the chief good. In an extremely generic form of hedonism, it seems as though the quality of sensual pleasure should be given no more weight than the quality of emotional pleasure and vice versa. Additionally, this sort of hedonism would hold that the acquisition of kinetic pleasures would increase overall pleasure to seemingly no end, a concept which Epicurus’ doctrine would reject. Even if we understand death to be a genuine ceasing to exist, we must conjecture that it is bad for a person to die in the sense that it terminates even the possibility to acquire more pleasure. Under this concept of hedonism, we must agree that a person who lives a pleasurable life for ...
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.
Jeremy Bentham spent most of his life focused on what he saw as failings in the justice system. He felt that there were “irrational and chaotic foundations” in the leadership of his time (Lawhead, p465). Bentham did not believe that morality was ingrained in every person from birth, or that moral laws were the same for everyone – and since there was no scientific proof of these things, things that the former government had come to regard as fact, Bentham dismissed them. What Bentham did believe was that pleasure and pain were experienced by each and every person, even if the sources were different. He also believed that achieving this pleasure was the end goal of every person. Even when a person does something that takes the pleasure of others into account, ultimately it is in order to indirectly promote their own pleasure. Therefore he came up with a method for calculating the amount of pain and pleasure that a situation created. Then, by adding up these amounts and determining which course of action provided the most pleasure, for all in the situation, he determi...
Mill says “Of two pleasures, if there be one to which all or almost all who have experience of both give a decided preference, irrespective of any feeling of moral obligation to prefer it, that is the more desirable pleasure.” (541) The pleasure that people choose over a different pleasure, event though they may undergo more discomfort to get it is the pleasure deemed higher. Moreover, Mill states that people will always prefer the pleasure with the highest appeal, “few human creatures would consent to be changed into any of the lower animals, for promise of the fullest allowance of the beast’s pleasures” (541). Since the human already has a higher level of pleasure than that of the animal, the human will never choose to go down a level even if they were promised endless amounts of pleasure
When Bentham writes that, “By utility is meant that property in any object, whereby it tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness, (all this in or to prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil, or unhappi- ness to the party whose interest is considered.” He is basically saying do whatever means necessary to make the most out of it and if it applies to the individual, it only needs to benefit the individual but if it is referring to the community, the community must benefit as a whole. One should feel pleasure, but avoid pain since it represents the evil in one’s life. The ultimate goal of one’s life is to reach the climax of happiness, because that marks the end of the path. The author appeals to all three devices: ethos, logos and pathos because they are all incorporated into his writings.
John Stuart Mill claims that people often misinterpret utility as the test for right and wrong. This definition of utility restricts the term and denounces its meaning to being opposed to pleasure. Mill defines utility as units of happiness caused by an action without the unhappiness caused by an action. He calls this the Greatest Happiness Principle or the Principle of Utility. Mill’s principle states that actions are right when they tend to promote happiness and are wrong when they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. Happiness is defined as intended pleasure and the absence of pain while unhappiness is defined as pain and the lack of pleasure. Therefore, Mill claims, pleasure and happiness are the only things desirable and good. Mill’s definition of utilitarianism claims that act...
Nevertheless, while Utilitarianism is the key approach of Mill's politics, in On Liberty, Mill's ideal of utility departs from this discourse by disregarding the concept of natural rights. As mentioned earlier, individuality derives from personal development and self-realisation, 'grounded on the permanent interests of man as a progressive beings' (Mill, [1859] 2009, p.20), and this is the true utility of individuality. Thus, 'higher pleasures' (intellectual and moral) are valued more than base pleasures (physical or emotional), contributing to the society, and producing higher forms of happiness. In this sense, Mill 'left the true utilitarian spirit far behind' (Berkowitz, 200, p.148). Within his model, utility no longer accepts 'lower pleasures', embracing the most virtuous principles of individuality and liberty of
Explain why Mill distinguishes between higher and lower pleasures and assess whether he achieves his aim or not.
Bentham realised that because this theory is based on the outcome of our actions it may be difficult to assess fairly which action will produce the most happiness. He therefore developed the ‘hedonistic calculus’, a form of calculating the happiness resulting from an act by assessing 7 different factors of the pleasure produced such as intensity and duration. In doing this Bentham was attempting to create some sort of ...
The ethical theory of utilitarianism is associated with the philosopher Jeremy Bentham. Utilitarianism essentially is the theory that good is what causes a person pleasure and evil is what causes a person pain. Bentham’s utilitarianism is sometimes titled Act Utilitarianism because it focuses on individual actions A “right” action, according to Betham, is one that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Where a “wrong” action is one that would cause more pain than pleasure. Before a person commits an action, they should look at the consequences that it can have on the individual and others. Hedonic Calculus is a method in determining how much pleasure or pain an action will elicit. Hedonic Calculus consists of seven criteria including intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity and extent. Each criteria can be given a score between -10 (worst pain) to +10 (highest pleasure). The action becomes ethical and moral if there is an overall net happiness for everyone that is affected. An acti...
Bentham’s Utilitarianism sees the highest good as the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Jeremy Bentham believed that by adding up the amounts of pleasure and pain for each possible act we should be able to choose the good thing to do. Happiness equaled pleasure minus pain. Bentham provided a way of measuring pleasure and pain, he called it the hedonic calculus. There are seven criteria to this calculus. First being the intensity being measured – how strong is the pleasure. The second criteria, duration – how long will the pleasure last. The third, certainty – how likely or unlikely is the pleasure. Fourth, Propinquity - How far off in the future is the pleasure or pain. The fifth, fecundity – what is the likely hood that a succession of pleasure will follow. The sixth criteria, purity – What is the probability that the pain will lead to other pain. Lastly, is the extent – how many people will be affected. This calculus gave Bentham a method of testing whether an action is morally right in that if it was good it would result in the most pleasurable outcome, having weighed up all the elements. These factors weigh up the potential amount of pleasure or pain which might arise from moral actions to decide which would be the best option to take. Ideally this formula should determine which act has the best tendency and is therefore
I agree with Mill’s hedonistic view of happiness. Mill believes that pleasure is a fundamental value because it promotes happiness, and diminishes the feelings of pain and unhappiness. The objections to hedonism are invalid because it is always better to be intelligent and consciously aware of everything in one's life, as opposed to being content and selfish, mimicking the lifestyle of a pig whose pleasures have all been satisfied.