Happiness: John Stuart Mill vs Immanuel Kant

Happiness: John Stuart Mill vs Immanuel Kant

Length: 1354 words (3.9 double-spaced pages)

Rating: Excellent

Open Document

Essay Preview

More ↓
Happiness. People go to any means by which to obtain the many varied materials and issues
that induce pleasures in each individual, and intrinsically, this emotion
remains the ultimate goal, John Stuart Mill, a nineteenth century philosopher,
correctly advocated the pursuit of happiness, and maintained the concept that
above all other values, pleasure existed as the final destination, Mill's
hedonistic views correctly and rationally identified a natural human tendency,
and his Utilitarian arguments strongly support the theory that above all else,
happiness is the most important dream to be fulfilled. Upon researching for
this paper, I came across a counter argument, which was based on metaphysics.
Immanuel Kant, in Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, defends his strong
beliefs in the issue of a good will, and surfaces as MM's chief opponent on the
topic of metaphysics, The issue diminishes to a clash between emotions and
pleasures ve rses rationality and logic. Yet, what use is logic when the good
agent is miserable? Mill's stance within Utilitarianism exists as the more
favorable of the two beliefs, for happiness exist as the one intrinsically
favorable element, not an emotionless mind.

The main defender of the Utilitarian system exists within the Greatest
happiness Principle. Mill lived as a chief advocate of this concept, which
supports the idea that a decision is morally correct as long as it increases and
encourages pleasures and happiness. Kant, however, in his endless quest to
remain separate from emotions and thrive only on logic, would argue that
autonomy should be placed above happiness in a list of intrinsic values. A good
will, however, does not comfort an individual in any way if happiness does not
accompany this asset, Consider this example of a seemingly happily married
couple. The wife in this duo is madly in love with her husband fiercely loyal,
and completely happy with her marriage and children. The husband, however, as
wrongfully strayed, and had a brief, but damaging affair behind his wife's back.
Kant would argue that autonomy reigns over pleasure, and the woman should
therefore want to be informed of her husband's adultery, Mill would greatly
disagree. By revealing the secret of the past affair, the woman's happy world
would be instantly shattered. Her pride would diminish, her stability would
fall apart, and the children especially would be forced to view a nasty side of
their beloved father. In this case, individual control is greatly overshadowed
by the need for happiness. The husband is no longer acting unfaithful and the
family can easily continue to live in a happy realm, If the secret were to

How to Cite this Page

MLA Citation:
"Happiness: John Stuart Mill vs Immanuel Kant." 123HelpMe.com. 15 Dec 2019
    <https://www.123helpme.com/view.asp?id=68699>.

Need Writing Help?

Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.

Check your paper »

John Stuart Mill And Immanuel Kant Essay

- There has been an ongoing debate regarding torture and ethical reasoning to determine when or if its ever ok. Modern scholars such as Alan Dershowitz, Sam Harris, and Charles & Gregory Fried, have expressed different ideas on ethical torture. Ideas of ethical reasoning were established by John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant. Even though they did not specifically use torture as an example of ethical reasoning for decision making their rational can still be applied to this topic. Immanuel Kant believed our moral decisions are based on categorical imperative....   [tags: Ethics, Immanuel Kant, Morality]

Research Papers
1202 words (3.4 pages)

Immanuel Kant And John Stuart Mill Essay example

- Even though at the first glance, the two most influential philosophers in human history - Immanuel Kant and John-Stuart Mill seem to have a lot of disagreements on the central concepts of their moral philosophies – for example, while Kant is concerned more about the intentions of an action, Mill, on the other hand, believes that the consequences of an action are the only justification necessary for an act to be good or moral or right, they still have beliefs in common, such as the concept of the greater good and base their moral systems on a fundamental first principle....   [tags: Morality, Ethics, Utilitarianism, Immanuel Kant]

Research Papers
1502 words (4.3 pages)

John Stuart Mill And Bernard Williams Essay

- Utilitarianism is a difficult topic to fathom, for it requires a large amount of questions and self-evaluation. In order to understand utilitarianism, think of bad versus bad. A principle stating that when one is faced with two difficult decisions, which choice would be less harmful for all of those involved. John Stuart Mill and Bernard Williams describe utilitarianism as pain versus pleasure or the lesser of two evils approach, and how that approach ties into ones ultimate choice. Utilitarianism is not about the pursuit of happiness, rather, it is really about picking which evil is the best evil....   [tags: Ethics, Immanuel Kant, Morality, John Stuart Mill]

Research Papers
934 words (2.7 pages)

Essay about The Utilitarianism Of John Stuart Mill

- Many have different views when it comes to defining morality and the ways in which a person can achieve morality. The three different views that we have discussed in class are the utilitarianism of John Stuart Mill, the non-consequentialism of Immanuel Kant, and the virtue-based ethics of Aristotle. The view on morality that i disagree with most is Mill’s utilitarianism for various reasons. I believe that the other two views have their flaws, but Mill’s view is by far the most flawed, in my opinion....   [tags: Utilitarianism, Ethics, John Stuart Mill]

Research Papers
852 words (2.4 pages)

Utilitarianism, By Jeremy Bentham And John Stuart Mill Essay

- Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill are credited for developing the idea of utilitarianism. Simply put, utilitarianism is doing the most good for the greatest amount of people. In this ethical system, an individuals rights are essentially less important than the good of the majority. Happiness is what is valued in this ethical system. Ultimately, the action that leads to the most good is the right ethical action. Basically, no act is simply right or wrong, but rather it depends on the happiness that comes out doing that act....   [tags: Ethics, Morality, Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill]

Research Papers
711 words (2 pages)

John Stuart Mill 's Morality Essay

- As I grew older my grandmother used the word “morals” more and more often. She would explain to me that it is important to have morals, to treat yourself and others with respect and to always do what’s “right”. It wasn’t until I was much older that I realized that the idea of what’s “morally” right isn’t always lawful and that everybody 's definition of morals or what 's moral is different. John Stuart Mill 's defines whether an action is morally just or not based off of the amount of happiness obtained from said action....   [tags: Ethics, Morality, Immanuel Kant, Human]

Research Papers
1084 words (3.1 pages)

Immanuel Kant And John Stuart Mill Essay example

- When you ask your friend what ethics means to them you may get a different answer. You may hear responses that reference religion, laws or whatever feels morally right. The framework for ethics suggest that feelings, religion, law, science, and cultural influences should not be considered when determining if what your about to do is ethical. Here is what you do consider ethical reasoning, • Utilitarian, do the most good or the least amount of harm. • Rights, treat people with dignity and not a means to an ends, if you can’t treat everyone ethically then it should be fair....   [tags: Ethics, Morality, Deontological ethics]

Research Papers
1435 words (4.1 pages)

The Works Of Philosophers Immanuel Kant And John Stuart Mill Essay

- Animal Experimentation The works of philosophers Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill have been used more substantively in animal advocacy movements, even though Mill’s utilitarianism was genuinely animal amicable at the time; he believed that in any circumstance the right action would be the action that have a tendency to minimize the pain and suffering, and expand the pleasure and happiness, of all humans and animals which in return should impact our treatment of animals. Immanuel Kant a philosopher who is often mention in animal advocacy movement did not believe we had any direct ethical duties to animal....   [tags: Animal rights, Animal testing]

Research Papers
992 words (2.8 pages)

Utilitarianism, by John Stuart Mill Essay

- In John Stuart Mill’s work Utilitarianism, Mill is trying to provide proof for his moral theory utilitarianism and disprove all the objections against it. Mill defines utilitarianism as a theory based on the principle that "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness" (Ch. II, page 7). He calls this the “greatest happiness principle. Mill says, “No reason can be given why the general happiness is desirable, except the fact that each person desires his own happiness, so far as he thinks it is attainable....   [tags: Morality Principle, General Happiness]

Research Papers
2028 words (5.8 pages)

Essay on Immanuel Kant Versus John Stuart Mill

- Immanuel Kant Versus John Stuart Mill Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill; two opposing philosophers of their time. Even though they were living in different countries, their works have been against each other. In his book, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant argues that there is nothing better than wanting goodwill by itself. He emphasizes the importance of goodwill over and over again and tries to show how effective moral philosophy can be if goodwill is used as the key element....   [tags: Papers Philosophy Morals Moral Essays ]

Research Papers
1168 words (3.3 pages)

Related Searches

become uncovered, all members of this circumstance unavoidably would become
terribly disappointed, Under the Greatest Happiness Principle, the wife should
not be informed. Since happiness truly lives as the ultimate in human desires,
sparing such immense amounts of pain truly is the logical choice, Mill's
argument prevails, and all those involved remain happy. Through this example,
one can easily see that although autonomy is often a favorable feature, it does
not overshadow the importance of happiness.

One of the main arguments against Utilitarianism exist in the lack of
apparent fairness. An advocate of the Kantian logic principle would argue that
Mill's belief system does not allow for equal treatment, When considering what
is best for an entire society, however, it is necessary for certain individuals
to endure suffering. The good of society remains the ultimate goal, and
unfortunate pain is therefore inevitable, If young children are being killed in
a certain community, the obvious good for this society is discovering and
punishing the murderer. Especially when children are involved, people
automatically demand prompt justice. The officials of this area have searched
immensely for the accused, yet no leads have surfaced, and the community
suddenly erupts with anger, they demand that someone be punished, As a
Utilitarian, the police chief sees a window of opportunity. A drug dealer has
recently been brought in on yet another drug selling offense, and the chief
decides to coerce the invalu able member of society into confessing the crime at
hand, By doing so, the community instantly reunites in support and a dangerous
and deadly revolt is avoided, and a menace to society is right back where he
would have been regardless of his confession: behind bars, Kant, however, would
argue that logically, the chase for the true offender should continue. He would
shun the emotional decision to make the whole society happy by ignoring the
rational decisions. But since the community obviously chooses happiness over
logic, Kant's arguments are irrelevant. In addition, Kant believes in a
decision making process completely separate from the natural human emotions,
Such a demand is possible only for a character such as Star Trek's Dr. Spock,
for human emotions are as much a part of every day life as the decision making
process itself. Logically speaking, therefore, Mill's Utilitarianism arguments
maintain the largest dose of validity.

Other opponents to the philosophical viewpoint of Utilitarianism state
that followers of this belief system often promote an ignorant lifestyle, They
maintain that advocates of the Greatest Happiness Principle believe in the
theory that "ignorance is bliss," Again, such reasoning is quite faulty.
Displaying the erroneousness of this statement can be done by examining the
issue of AIDS, An opponent of Utilitarianism would say an Infected HIV victim
would not want to be aware of his disorder, Such a belief is extremely incorrect.
Mill and other Utilitarian are strong advocates of education, for with
intelligence, greater levels of achievement and happiness can be obtained. A
member of this belief system would rightly argue that being aware of the
disorder could increase long-term happiness, for treatments and support from
friends and family could greatly aid the victim's fight against his or her
alhnents, Mills therefore strongly support education systems and believe in
making society as a whole as happy as possible. In the case of the AIDS victim,
a Utilitarian would also support the notification of the disorder to the victim
in order to spare others of contracting the virus, The happiness of the majority
would not be increased by an unknowing HIV carrier spreading the disease to
other defenseless individuals, Utilitarianism clearly is not a ignorant way to
live, and the Kantian philosophy of ignoring the irrational system of emotions
cannot refute this standard.

Without happiness, the other opportunities and necessities lose nearly
all levels of importance. A true Utilitarian supports only those concepts that
promote the highest levels of pleasures, and as Mill states, encourages only
those actions that promote real happiness, From a Kantian viewpoint, rationality
and the possession of a good will remains the most important element, but even
someone with the truest and most logical of intentions can easily exist in a
realm of pure depression. The one link that exists between these opposite
belief systems is the concept that, all decisions should be made outside of
one's personality. The key is that Kant said this decisions should be made
without any regard for human emotions, A request of this magnitude is a part of
a utopian society only, for ignoring one's emotions is an illogical assumption
in itself, If your child and wife are both dying, deciding which one to save
cannot be made without some emotional influence, Utilitarianism allows for the
emotional side of life but requests only that the Greatest Happiness Principle
be strictly followed. Any truly decent human being naturally follows such a
request every day, Decisions are made based on the greatest level of happiness,
That way, the largest majority of people benefit, and the greatest amount of
happiness is achieved. Yet as Kant believed, a more morally correct decision
lies at the heart of every dilemma.

How does one decide who is morally more correct to save in an instance
where two cherished loved ones are passing away, and only one individual may be
saved? And even more importantly, how does one do so without regard emotions?
I personally feel that living strictly by the doctrine of Kantian philosophy is
completely impossible. Being a Utilitarian and hedonist, such as Mill, makes
more sense to me.
Return to 123HelpMe.com