The novel, Hard Times by Charles Dickens revolves around the central idea of English society, including the social, economical, and political issues during the mid 19th century. Fact superior to imagination is one of the main themes of this novel, apparent mainly in book one. Mr. Gradgrind raises his children to ignore their imaginations and anything that is not cold hard fact. For example, Louisa, his daughter, in particular tends to question this rationalism with her curiosity about the circus. There are countless examples in which Mr. Gradgrind bestows his “wisdom” on both his children, and students in the education system located in Coketown. The way Mr. and Mrs. Gradgrind raised their children, described by Dickens, parallels the way in which John Stuart Mill was raised by his own parents in London during the 19th century. John, similarly to Louisa, was educated with the idea that any of his own imagination or creativity was wrong. His parents would burn toys in front of him, emulating the idea that any object or concept that brings happiness is simply wrong. His father, Sir James Stuart Mill, also had a major impact on Mill’s childhood and even manhood. The majority of his infancy was centered on education, and the thought that hard-core knowledge was the solution to any conflict. During this time, his father would make him read Greek and Latin classics to ensure that he were prepared for disciplinary jobs in the future. Through this childhood of fact, and purely fact, along with a lack of moral influences instituted in his life, constituted Mill to become an advocate for utilitarianism. This theory was proposed by Jeremy Bentham who was indeed Mill’s family friend and tutor, emphasizing the idea of maximizing happiness and ...
... middle of paper ...
...ed to recognize. His intelligence and knowledge had been nurtured and educated by his father, but not his feelings. This seemed to have a major impact on John and his writings. Although he continued his political activities, he still felt as though something was missing. It was not until Mill connected with the poetry of Wordsworth to pull him out of this so critical state of being (Anschutz 1-5). In Mill’s early twenties, he submerged himself into the substantial influence of historicism, the main genre Mill’s father ordered him to read as a child. This charge inspired Mill to search for a new philosophic radicalism, as Colin Heydt so clearly notes, “That would be more sensitive to the limits on freedom imposed by culture and history and would emphasize the cultivation of our humanity, including the cultivation of dispositions of feeling and imagination” (Heydt).
For more than two thousand years, the human race has struggled to effectively establish the basis of morality. Society has made little progress distinguishing between morally right and wrong. Even the most intellectual minds fail to distinguish the underlying principles of morality. A consensus on morality is far from being reached. The struggle to create a basis has created a vigorous warfare, bursting with disagreement and disputation. Despite the lack of understanding, John Stuart Mill confidently believes that truths can still have meaning even if society struggles to understand its principles. Mill does an outstanding job at depicting morality and for that the entire essay is a masterpiece. His claims throughout the essay could not be any closer to the truth.
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.
The foundation of Utility is based on John Stuart Mill's notion that one must strive to act in such a way to produce the greatest good of the greatest number. Utility itself relies on the responsibility of the individual to remain impartial in his endeavor to produce the greatest good, looking past such extrinsic influences that may render the individual to seek a biased sense of satisfaction. In order for Utility to function as Mill wanted it to, honest judgment and objectivity must be an essential part of one's drive for the acquisition of the greatest good.
To kill or let live will explore the utilitarian views of John Stuart Mill, as well as the deontological views of Immanuel Kant on the thought experiment derived from British Philosopher Philippa Foot. Foot had great influence in the advancement of the naturalistic point of view of moral philosophy. The exploration of Philippa Foot’s Rescue I and Rescue II scenarios will provide the different views on moral philosophy through the eyes of John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant.
Utilitarianism, a book written by John Stuart Mill during mid 19th century in England, encompasses Mill’s major viewpoints about the constructs of pleasure and pain for human beings; as well as utility in itself as a way of promoting political and social goals. As Mill quotes, “A cultivated mind, that is any mind to which the fountains of knowledge have been opened and which have been taught to exercises its faculties-find sources of inexhaustible interest in all that surrounds it; in nature, art, poetry, history, and the ways of man of past and their prospects for the future” (Mill, Utilitarianism, p. 372). This passage directly connects to Mill’s interpretation of Utilitarianism which is ultimately achieving happiness, or least one of his
Case: You are at home one evening with your family, when all of a sudden, a man throws open the door. He’s holding a shotgun in his hands, and he points it directly at your family. It seems he hasn’t seen you yet. You quietly and carefully retrieve the pistol your father keeps in his room for home protection. Are you morally allowed to use the pistol to kill the home invader?
people’s overall happiness and this is what God desires, so in fact this theory includes God
John Stuart Mill writes in a publication in the 1800s about the subject of happiness. John is a philosopher who is trying to say in this quote that happiness is a byproduct of what we strive to achieve in our lives everyday, whether that be doing what’s right in our mind or just having fun partaking in one of our hobbies. Many have pondered this question and have come up with varying conclusions. Some believe that a state of happiness is a choice, when it in fact it is more complex than that. In order to achieve happiness however, we must be indirect about it as happiness cannot be a conscious feeling, and in order to achieve it in the first place, we need to pursue things other than our own happiness to become happy. (Brink 89)
MIll presents a form of hedonism that is quite contrary to its usual connotation. His "utilitarianism" is a principle stating that every person desires more happiness than pain and that actions are moral if they are condusive to this desire. Utilitarianism is empircally based, or centered around observation. Rather than seeking pleasure in any form, Mill contends that some pleasures are greater than others. He believes that, as humans, we are capable of intellectual pleasures rather than simple animal pleasures, and that these intellectual pleasure provide much more quality, which is far superior to quanity. Thus need a way to discern between which is more worthwhile. According to Mill, the only reasonable way to do this is to look at the
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.
Philio Gabriel (2010) stated that John Stuart Mill was a very intelligent philosopher of history. He studied since young and ended his working life by working with the parliament. Throughout his lifetime, as a philosopher he brought and suggested the concept of liberty in the society.
Philosophy has offered many works and debates on morality and ethics. One of these works is the concept of utilitarianism. One of the most prominent writers on the theory of utilitarianism is John Stuart Mill. He suggests that utilitarianism may be the guide for morality. His writing on utilitarianism transcends through the present in relation to the famous movie The Matrix. In the movie, people live in a virtual reality where they are relatively happy and content and the real world is filled with a constant struggle to survive. The movie revolves around Neo, who tries to free people from the virtual world in which they live. In light of utilitarianism, freeing these people would be morally wrong. In this essay, I will first explain John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism and some objections it faces. I will then talk about utilitarianism’s relation to The Matrix and why it would be morally wrong to free the people and subject them to the real world.
Explain why Mill distinguishes between higher and lower pleasures and assess whether he achieves his aim or not.
Mr. Gradgrind was a prominent school head that believed in “realities, facts, and calculations.” He is described as a cold-hearted man that strictly forbids the fostering of imagination and emotion, especially in his two children: Tom and Louisa (Dickens 5). Mr. Gradgrind raises his children in Coketown, a Capitalistic industrial town that Dickens calls, a waste-yard with “litter of barrels and old iron, the shining heaps of coals, the ashes everywhere, shrouded in a veil of mist and rain” (128). In this town that seems to be impenetrable to the sun’s rays, his children grow up lacking social connections, mor...
Dickens uses Thomas Gradgrind to demonstrate exactly how a basic philosophy of rationality self-interest. Thomas Gradgrind has faith that human nature can be restrained, calculated, and ruled completely by facts. Certainly, his schooling attempts to turn young children into tiny machines. Dickens’s main goal in Hard Times was to exemplify the risks of letting humans become nothing but machines, signifying that the lack of kindness and imagination in life would be intolerable. Louisa balms her father for only teaching her lessons on facts and nothing on life, she feels that that’s the reason she is unhappy in her marriage. “All that I know is, your philosophy and your teaching will not save me. How, father,...