The Order Of Pleasures In John Stuart Mill's The Brothers Karamazov

1068 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The paradox of hedonism

John Stuart Mill explores the order of pleasures throughout the second chapter (“What Utilitarianism Is”) of his master ethical composition, Utilitarianism. When determining the quality of two pleasures, Mill firmly asserts that the superior pleasure is distinguished by the “decided preference” of those who have experienced both (8). Mill expands on this claim in subsequent paragraphs, contending that one finds greater pleasure in increasingly intellectual activities. In summation, Mill claims that (I.) usually, intellectual pleasures are higher in order than base pleasures, and (II.) a more intelligent person can access superior pleasures than a person of lower faculties. I will also explore the permanence and ephemerality of superior and …show more content…

humans of elevated faculties), and (III.) concluding the order of pleasures based on the decided general preference of these exceptional humans. When evaluating the pleasures of receiving a sensual back massage and reading The Brothers Karamazov, one would first examine the apparent preference of those who have experienced both pleasures. Many have devoted their academic and personal lives to understanding the content and meaning of The Brothers Karamazov, but few, if any, with the capability of comprehending this work have devoted their lives to receiving back massages. Furthermore, most intellectuals who work in the field of philosophy show a decided preference to studying this novel when juxtaposed with receiving a back massage. Therefore, the pleasure of reading The Brothers Karamazov must be of superior quality than that of receiving a back …show more content…

most intellectual) pleasure available. For example, the greatest pleasure available to a human of elevated faculties might be writing a computer program that analyzes the distribution of water in Africa and increases access to water (and therefore happiness) on the continent. Applying this example to Mill’s hedonic comparison test, one could logically arrive at the absurdity that this person should never brush their teeth, since brushing one’s teeth is a baser pleasure and does not contribute to the principle of utility as much as the noble pursuit of computer programming. Essentially, Mill’s hedonic comparison test does not adequately account for mundane activity as a prerequisite for higher order

Show More
Related

  • Utilitarianism and Morality in John Stuart Mill´s Essay

    1012 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill Vs Kierkegaard Essay

    1200 Words  | 3 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill: Exploring 19th Century Utilitarianism

    1388 Words  | 3 Pages

    The second classic criticism of Utilitarian Principle is that Mill’s dichotomy of higher and lower pleasures create the need to calculate the happiness derived from each category of pleasures. This has left critics asking “Is a dissatisfied Socrates better off than a satisfied fool?” In response, Mill says that people learn to distinguish physical (or lower) pleasures from mental (or higher) pleasures with training. We possess the tendency to favor the higher pleasures, as we are human beings rather than mere

    Read More

  • The Foundation of Utility and John Stuart Mill

    718 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism

    715 Words  | 2 Pages

    In John Stuart Mill’s literature (575-580), he describes a system of ethics which he dubs as Utilitarianism. Mill’s Utilitarianism is unique because it is a Consequentialist theory – it focuses on the consequences of things, rather than individual processes involved. In other words, Mill argues that, for an action to be morally correct, it must solely contribute towards benefitting the greater good and maximizing humanity’s happiness. I argue that this ethical theory is flawed and cannot be used as a standard to gauge the morality of our actions because, since Utilitarianism is so entrenched on the outcomes that are produced, it has the potential to sanction clearly wrong actions, so long as they promote the general welfare. In this critique,

    Read More

  • Aristotle Wins Ethically: A comparison between John Stuart Mill and Aristotle on happiness

    1260 Words  | 3 Pages

    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...

    Read More

  • A Comparison of John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant's Ethical Theories

    3195 Words  | 7 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism In John Stuart Mill

    1161 Words  | 3 Pages

    Mill says “Of two pleasures, if there be one to which all or almost all who have experience of both give a decided preference, irrespective of any feeling of moral obligation to prefer it, that is the more desirable pleasure.” (541) The pleasure that people choose over a different pleasure, event though they may undergo more discomfort to get it is the pleasure deemed higher. Moreover, Mill states that people will always prefer the pleasure with the highest appeal, “few human creatures would consent to be changed into any of the lower animals, for promise of the fullest allowance of the beast’s pleasures” (541). Since the human already has a higher level of pleasure than that of the animal, the human will never choose to go down a level even if they were promised endless amounts of pleasure

    Read More

  • Mill's Utilitarianism

    984 Words  | 2 Pages

    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...

    Read More

  • Philosophy: John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism

    1314 Words  | 3 Pages

    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...

    Read More

  • Stuart Mill Paternalism

    1093 Words  | 3 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • Preference Theory and Well-Being

    1864 Words  | 4 Pages

    3. Feldman,
 Fred.
2004.
“The
Quest 
for 
the
Good
 Life”
 in
 Pleasure 
and
 the
Good 
Life.
Oxford:
Oxford 
University
Press

    Read More

  • UtiIitarianism

    8677 Words  | 18 Pages

    A PASSING remark is all that needs be given to the ignorant blunder of supposing that those who stand up for utility as the test of right and wrong, use the term in that restricted and merely colloquial sense in which utility is opposed to pleasure. An apology is due to the philosophical opponents of utilitarianism, for even the momentary appearance of confounding them with any one capable of so absurd a misconception; which is the more extraordinary, inasmuch as the contrary accusation, of referring everything to pleasure, and that too in its grossest form, is another of the common charges against utilitarianism: and, as has been pointedly remarked by an able writer, the same sort of persons, and often the very same persons, denounce the theory "as impracticably dry when the word utility precedes the word pleasure, and as too practicably voluptuous when the word pleasure precedes the word utility." Those who know anything about the matter are aware that every writer, from Epicurus to Bentham, who maintained the theory of utility, meant by it, not something to be contradistinguished from pleasure, but pleasure itself, together with exemption from pain; and instead of opposing the useful to the agreeable or the ornamental, have always declared that the useful means these, among other things. Yet the common herd, including the herd of writers, not only in newspapers and periodicals, but in books of weight and pretension, are perpetually falling into this shallow mistake. Having caught up the word utilitarian, while knowing nothing whatever about it but its sound, they habitually express by it the rejection, or the neglect, of pleasure in some of its forms; of beauty, of ornament, or of amusement. Nor is the term thus ignorantly misapplied solely in disparagement, but occasionally in compliment; as though it implied superiority to frivolity and the mere pleasures of the moment. And this perverted use is the only one in which the word is popularly known, and the one from which the new generation are acquiring their sole notion of its meaning. Those who introduced the word, but who had for many years discontinued it as a distinctive appellation, may well feel themselves called upon to resume it, if by doing so they can hope to contribute anything towards rescuing it from this utter degradation.*

    Read More

  • There Isnt The Pleasure Of Food Enough Summary

    1615 Words  | 4 Pages

    Some questions were brought up in order to clear up any confusion about the discussion of quality and quantity of pleasure. When comparing quantity and quality, most people say that they get more pleasure from doing one thing than another (25). Another issue that was brought up was if we could separate the pleasures we get from eating and drinking and other pleasures.

    Read More

  • Reflections on Hedonism

    616 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

More about The Order Of Pleasures In John Stuart Mill's The Brothers Karamazov

Open Document