Philosopher, John Stuart Mill, was one of the most influential thinkers in the history of philosophical study, having had a significant impact in the area of Liberalism, among other counterparts. Apart from his interest in political philosophy, Mill was also an advocate of Utilitarianism which was an ethical theory originally brought about by late philosopher, Jeremy Bentham. Mill’s take on Utilitarian philosophy enhances, as well as contradicts some of Bentham’s earlier views. In this essay, I will explore Mill’s expansion on Bentham’s original take on the ethical theory of “Utilitarianism”, as the theory was significantly broadened by Mill’s contribution. I will be focusing on Mill’s theory of higher and lower pleasures, as well as touching …show more content…
If one chooses a particular pleasure over another, even if that option is accompanied by discomfort and is of lesser quantity than the other pleasure, then the former is of greater quality then the latter. This point further supports Mill’s claim that given equal opportunity to access any amount of pleasures, humans will always choose the option that appeals closest to our higher faculties. An educated person would no more choose to become ignorant, than a human would choose to become a lesser being, such as an animal. Even though those who live by their higher selves often suffer the most, they would still not choose to become lesser, opting instead to maintain their own dignity. This choice often results in one being less content, knowing the deeper limitations of the world. However, their pleasure is of higher character than if they lived by their most basic desires. Encapsulating this principle, Mill writes "It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. If the fool or the pig are of a different opinions, it is because they only know their side of the question.” Meaning, it is best when one has experienced both higher and lower pleasures in order to assess the quality of …show more content…
His arguments actually clash with the basic principles of Utilitarianism. In Mills essay, he expresses that it would be better to be unhappy as Socrates, than to be happy as a fool. This statement is in direct contradiction with the theory of Utilitarianism itself. The theory depicts the notion that people should strive for the greatest happiness for the largest number of people above all else. Choosing to live by a higher intellectual path seems a different theory altogether. Also to say we should choose something that may cause us suffering to any degree, seems rather off course from the original goal of ultimate happiness. Mill defends this point by saying that Socrates is happier in the end, having achieved access to higher realms, and therefore lived with higher pleasures in his life. However, this can only be presumed true, there is no actual evidence regarding Socrates leading a life bountiful with pleasure. Another possible inadequacy in Mill’s logic is the idea that the types of pleasures he has deemed as higher pleasures, are actually more pleasurable. Activities such as reading books, enjoying art, or writing poetry are certainly to some, highly fulfilling past times. To others, however, Fine arts and literature are simply not comparable to the pleasure derived from
From top to bottom, John Stuart Mill put forth an incredible essay depicting the various unknown complexities of morality. He has a remarkable understanding and appreciation of utilitarianism and throughout the essay the audience can grasp a clearer understanding of morality. Morality, itself, may never be totally defined, but despite the struggle and lack of definition it still has meaning. Moral instinct comes differently to everyone making it incredibly difficult to discover a basis of morality. Society may never effectively establish the basis, but Mill’s essay provides people with a good idea.
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
In his defense against the group of opponents who claim that the hedonistic foundations of utilitarianism make it a doctrine worthy of swine, Mill argues that the pleasure seeking of human beings cannot be likened to the pleasure seeking of pigs because the quality of pleasure that each party pursues is distinctly different. He also argues that human beings seeking high quality pleasure is proof that they are above
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
John Stuart Mills is a philosopher who is strongly associated with utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a philosophy which puts morality in the greater good. Often associated with sigma, the summation of benefit is the only determinant of what makes something morally right. In Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mills compares his form of utilitarianism with the Golden Rule of Jesus of Nazareth which states, “To do as you would be done by” and “To love your neighbor as yourself.” Mills states that these statements constitute the ideal perfection of utilitarian morality. The utilitarian morality as described previously is one where everyone acts in utility. This is so that the maximum amount of happiness can be attained which would satisfies everyone’s
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.
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
Mill takes on the claim that utilitarianism is fit for a swine. “…life has no higher end than pleasure - no better and nobler object of desire and pursuit... as a doctrine worthy only of swine... (however) Human beings have faculties more elevated than the animal appetites” (Mill, 1863, Ch. 2, p331). This objection identifies the flaws in Mill’s moral theory. It mentions that humans have higher capacities and more special moral values than just pleasure that we must recognize and take into account that utilitari...
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
All of the cases presented in utilitarianism and Mill’s views are very vast. Mill does have some good points but really avoided justifying his theory.
Explain why Mill distinguishes between higher and lower pleasures and assess whether he achieves his aim or not.
Mill begins his essay on Utilitarianism by explaining his Greatest Happiness Principle, stating actions are right in that they promote happiness and actions are wrong if they take happiness away (Mill, “What Utilitarianism Is,” para 2). Following from this idea, happiness is pleasure, and unhappiness is pain and the privation of pleasure (Mill, “What Utilitarianism Is,” para 2). In defending the equivalence between happiness and pleasure from his critics, Mill makes the claim that there is “the superiority of mental over bodily pleasures chiefly in the greater permanency, safety, uncostliness, etc., of the former” (Mill, “What Utilitarianism Is,” para 4). He claims that pleasures can differ both in quality and qua...
This principle promotes a life of more pleasure than pain by choosing actions that produce more happiness. These are conscious actions made that follow a life of utility and act in accordance with the “Greatest Happiness Principle.” Though Mill’s critics would argue that Utilitarianism is not a reasonable foundation for morality by not fulfilling a life of happiness, creating selfish or expedient people, and reducing human experience to animals, I would have to disagree. This principle promotes happiness and pleasure for all, along with aiding individuals to be less selfish, and an even slate for people of all characters. I find the “Greatest Happiness Principle” to be a relevant and altruistic foundation of morality. There is an emphasis on lives containing more pleasure than pain under the rule that one person cannot put their own happiness above others. I think a type of morality such as this would be more successful than other forms of morality because it wants every human life to be a life filled with more pleasure than pain. I see this as an appropriate foundation because it promotes good over bad, which is ultimately the function of morality as a whole. As written by Raymond Plant, “Since the principle of the individual is to try to satisfy his desires…the principle of society should be to try to advance the satisfactions of those who belong to the society…”
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.