John Stuart Mill And Utilitarianism

1183 Words3 Pages

Mill and Utilitarianism In utilitarianism John Stuart Mill introduced the idea of pleasures. All people seek to satisfy their desires, needs and happiness that mean prolonged and continuous pleasure. While utilitarianism is a theory directed against egoism which is opposes to the satisfaction of personal interest. The allowance of pleasure in every situation is determined by whether people contribute to the achievement of a higher purpose or general happiness. Morality is defined by Mill as rule by leading a man in his actions, through the observaing of which is delivered to all mankind the existence of the most free from suffering and intense pleasures. In utilitarianism priority of justice is possible in view of the priority of its bases. Justice is more than just one of the values, because its principles are derived independently of the other values. Unlike other practical principles, the moral law is not intended to advance any random interests and goals. Justice in utilitarianism does not include any ideas about welfare. Since the idea of justice precedes all purely empirical purposes, justice has a position in relation to the welfare and sets its limits. Utilitarianism and Kantian ethics are not just different, but also meet different experiences. Utilitarianism has been rising as an active position, it is aimed at improving the management of society and changes the laws. Kantian ethics is the position of the ethical individual who confronts the world, who takes on the most weight of ethical action. This burden means the execution of the duty and ignores all the desires. In the debate with the critics of utilitarianism Mill clarifies the principle of utility, which implies general happiness. General happiness requires no... ... middle of paper ... ...ple of the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people, in fact, he defended the principle of personal gain or personal benefit. The main law of nature in utilitarianism is the desire for personal happiness and the very continuation of the human race depends on the implementation of self-love. Kantian ethics is different. When we treat approvingly to another act, we are guided not mind public benefit or harm from these actions. We are aware of how these actions would have responded to us, and in us because there is consent or not consent to our own feelings. This is the property of our organization, and it has evolved from public life. We just experience with other people what they are going through and criticize the one who caused any suffering, then we attach ourselves to the same condemnation if they themselves cause of suffering to another person.

In this essay, the author

  • Analyzes how mill recognized kant's categorical imperative but with reservations. he believed that people should be guided in their actions by such rule.
  • Explains that kant's deontology affects not only the content of morality, but also its foundation.
Show More
Open Document