In this paper, I examine Mill’s distinction between higher and lower pleasures that he presents in his Utilitarianism. Then, I raise objections to Mill’s distinction by focusing on the ambiguity of his definition of pleasures and his concept of the competent judge. I conclude that, with a recalculation of the definition of pleasures, his distinction of higher and lower pleasures can support a broader theory of utilitarianism.
1. Examining Mill’s Distinction
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that is rooted in the belief that happiness, which is understood as pleasure and the privation of pain, is the only thing that is intrinsically good. Mill’s endorsement of this “greatest happiness principle” is as follows:
1.1: “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; 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.”
Thus, it seems that Mill is inclined to accept a version of Bentham’s hedonistic utilitarianism. That is to say, Mill seems to be endorsing a quantitative theory of utilitarianism, which works on the bases of maximizing the duration and intensity of pleasure. However, later in Utilitarianism, Mill addresses an objection concerning the idea that utilitarianism is a theory that “favors sensual or voluptuary pursuits (e.g. push-pin) over higher or nobler pursuits (e.g. poetry).” Thus, he makes the distinction between pleasures of the intellect, higher pleasure, and sensual, lower, pleasures. This is to ensure that utilitarianism is not seen as “a doctrine worthy only of swine.”
...
... middle of paper ...
..., we are able to find a definition that allows for a consistency between traditional hedonistic utilitarianism and Mill’s higher and lower pleasures by applying an interpretation based in Donner and Schmidt-Petri’s writings.
Works Cited
Brink, David, "Mill's Moral and Political Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = . sec. 2.3
Donner, W. and Fumerton, R. Mill, Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009, 4-5, 15-35.
Green, T.H., 1883, Prolegomena to Ethics, ed. D. Brink, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2003.
Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism. The Classical Utilitarians: Bentham and Mill. Edited by John Troyer. Hackett Publishing Co., 2003.
West, Henry R. An Introduction to Mill’s Utilitarian Ethics. Cambridge University Press, 2004. 48-73
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
Throughout the essay, Mills speaks highly of utilitarianism as a way to construct a happier more stable society. “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” (Mill 137). The ideas of such political philosophers such as Mills and Bentham enticed the modern world at the time of their publication, including the people of the U.S. The concept of utilitarianism started shaping America many years ago, and it is important to realize its consequence in modern day
John Stuart Mill believes in a utilitarian society where people are seen as “things.” Moreover, in utilitarianism the focus of the goal is “forward-looking”, in looking at the consequences but not the ini...
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.
Going along the ultimate end in an accordance to the greatest happiness principle is an existence exempt as far as possible from pain, and as rich as possible in enjoyments, both in point of quantity and quality; the test of quality, and the rule for measuring it against quantity, 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. This, being, according to the utilitarian opinion, the end of human action, is necessarily also the standard of morality. Which by definition are rules and precepts for human conduct, by the observance of existing, described to the greatest extent possible, and secured to all mankind and to nature.
John Stuart Mill argues that the rightness or wrongness of an action, or type of action, is a function of the goodness or badness of its consequences, where good consequences are ones that maximize the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. In this essay I will evaluate the essential features of Mill’s ethical theory, how that utilitarianism gives wrong answers to moral questions and partiality are damaging to Utilitarianism.
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
"Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill." Utilitarianism : past, present and future. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Mar. 2014.
Utilitarianism defined, is the contention that a man should judge everything based on the ability to promote the greatest individual happiness. In other words Utilitarianism states that good is what brings the most happiness to the most people. John Stuart Mill based his utilitarian principle on the decisions that we make. He says the decisions should always benefit the most people as much as possible no matter what the consequences might be. Mill says that we should weigh the outcomes and make our decisions based on the outcome that benefits the majority of the people. This leads to him stating that pleasure is the only desirable consequence of our decision or actions. Mill believes that human beings are endowed with the ability for conscious thought, and they are not satisfied with physical pleasures, but they strive to achieve pleasure of the mind as well.
Fitzpatrick, J. R. (2006). John Stuart Mill's political philosophy: Balancing freedom and the collective good. London [u.a.: Continuum.
For the purposes of brevity I will refer mainly to Bentham's and Mill's definitions of utilitarianism. In ...
When talking about pleasure there needs to be a distinction between the quality and the quantity. While having many different kinds of pleasures can be considered a good thing, one is more likely to favor quality over quantity. With this distinction in mind, one is more able to quantify their pleasures as higher or lesser pleasures by ascertaining the quality of them. This facilitates the ability to achieve the fundamental moral value that is happiness. In his book Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill offers a defining of utility as pleasure or the absence of pain in addition to the Utility Principle, where “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Mill 7). Through this principle, Mill emphasizes that it is not enough to show that happiness is an end in itself. Mill’s hedonistic view is one in support of the claim that every human action is motivated by or ought to be motivated by the pursuit of pleasure.