paper on mills

I decided to write my paper on Mill for two main reasons. The first deals with happiness and virtue and his take on these things. I would first off like to state my disagreements with his ideas and then I will speak of my agreements.

Mill contends that a less intelligent individual can not be as happy as one with a greater intellectual capacity. He also states that you would not be happy as swine even if everything you desired was given. I disagree. I feel that if you do not know of what you do not have then you cannot miss it. If we were less intelligent then we would be more content with the more primal needs that our ancestors had. If their needs were met then they were happy. Can we say the same for ourselves? Even if I had everything I ever wanted I could not be as happy as a caveman who had a mate, good hunting grounds and a full stomach. They had no one to worry about except protecting their clan. Yet we as a more civilized culture have much more to concern ourselves with. We must not only worry about ourselves and our families but also our neighbors and communities. If a caveman was considered virtuous it was because he was a good protector and provider and could be relied upon by his clan, yet for a man to now be considered virtuous it takes almost the same but this goal is much harder to achieve.

I do feel like Mill that to live virtuously is a goal that we should all strive to attain and like him I believe that these acts will not bring about happiness as an end but by acting in such a manner will contribute to your overall happiness exponentially. I also like the fact that that if something should bring about your happiness then it is ok to try and achieve it such as money. He does not say it is wrong to try and get as much money as you can and he says it is ok if it is a means to an end for bringing you happiness. Money will buy many of our desires and wishes and for many it is there main goal in life and yet for others obtaining the money itself is there goal. That alone will bring them happiness as it is there driving force and having enough will satisfy them. This in many occasions will make the person noxious to others but not always. We should look at this then that to try and achieve a lot of money but not become noxious and still trying to live virtuously would be acceptable. That is not necessarily everyone’s goal who hopes to acquire...

... middle of paper ...

... say I do not care if my child is sick and needs to go to the doctor I want a new pair of shoes and do not have enough money to do both? No it is unthought-of (At least for those with any morals or virtues). These are simple to deduct but what about when we face times of war? Who decides who is sacrificed then? Is it right of them to make such decisions? I say yes. If we have placed these people in a position of authority then they have that right because we have placed our trust in them to act in a manner that will be for the good of our community. It then becomes our right to make this sacrifice. If we do not then someone else must take our place. Then we have not only acted wrongly but we have shirked our duty to our community and placed someone else’s life at risk for our own cowardice or selfishness. Therefore the good of the community should be sacrificed for, and those in charge should be able to make those decisions based on the trust we placed in them when they received those positions.

I will sum this up by stating that living virtuously, morally and by willing to sacrifice for the greater good sum up most of Mill’s philosophy all of which I agree with wholeheartedly.