In his essay Utilitarianism, Mill defines and supports the moral theory of what utilitarianism is. Mill argues that utilitarianism corresponds with natural sentiments that emerge from humans’ social nature. Thus, if society were to accept utilitarianism, the people would see the concepts as morally obligatory. Mill believes that happiness is the only basis of morality and that the only desire people have is for happiness. In this essay I will examine Mill’s moral theory of utilitarianism and offer a critique of his position. Mill’s moral theory is unique in the sense that it unmistakably seeks to maximize not only quantity of happiness, but also the quality. His doctrine of higher pleasures establishes an order of superiority among contradictory kinds of enjoyments, which include ethical as well as non-moral types. In addition, Mill addresses the question of epistemology by raising the question: how do we know what is moral and what is immoral? He answers this question through introducing two ideas about morality: morals are evident a priori or they deduced from comp judges or in other words, morals are deducted from experience and observation. He also tells us exactly what utilitarianism is; happiness and the prevention of unhappiness. However, he also establishes that happiness for mankind is more than just a feeling of warm and fuzziness. Happiness involves not only the mind, but also the body and soul. As Mill clearly states in his essay, there is a vastly amount of difference between happiness and pleasure. Happiness is a state of being whereas pleasure is a sensation. One of Mill’s stronger and more famous arguments is that there are significant differences between the happiness for humans and the happiness for other, lowe... ... middle of paper ... ...time it would take to stop and weigh the pros and cons before making a decision. Wouldn’t that take an irrationally amount of time to do in a majority of the cases? This leads to further complications such as favoritism. Not only is an individual likely to favor himself and loved ones when doing the calculations, but the argument could be made that one has a duty to favor himself and his loved ones. If each and every one of us treated our own pleasure with the same regard as the happiness of every individual in this world, this world would necessitate an excruciating level of self-sacrifice. Mill makes several valid points in hi treatise on utilitarianism and there is much to be considered and learned from his argument. However, all of the cases presented in Utilitarianism and in Mill’s essay are extremely vast and raise many questions which Mill fails to address.