John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism 

Quote:

          “To suppose that life has (as they express it) no higher end than pleasure—no better and nobler object of desire and pursuit—they designate as utterly mean and grovelling as a doctrine worthy only of swine, to whom the followers of Epicurus were, at a very early period, contemptuously likened; and modern holders of the doctrine are occasionally made the subject of equally polite comparison by its German, French and English assailants.”

What I Expect To Learn:

          I expect to learn the Principle of Utility and what is utilitarianism in John Stuart Mill’s point of view. I also want to learn what higher and lower pleasures are as explained by Mill.

Chapter Review:

          The first thing on Mill’s discussion is the Principle of Utility. The Principle of Utility states that an action is considered right only when it causes happiness to other people and it is only right when pain is absent. On the other hand, actions are considered wrong when it brings about the opposite which is unhappiness and there is the presence of pain. This really confused me at first and when I finally came to an understanding with the concept of this, I really found it as disagreeable. I really don’t think that happiness is the absence of pain and that it is pleasure alone. For me, happiness is something beyond pleasure and aside from that, happiness isn’t really the absence of pain. Instead, happiness is one’s ability to look at pain positively. This means that he is able to accept pain, learn from it and become stronger because of it thus making us happier.

          The idea of higher and lower pleasures is really confusing. Although in my understanding, higher pleasure is when a person is not satisfied and easily contented. While a person of lower pleasures does not really have any standards instead, he is contented and satisfied with whatever he has already not trying to gain something better. If you ask me, higher pleasure is not better than lower pleasure and vice versa. I don’t really think that the other one’s better than the other. I think that there should only be moderation between the two.  

What I Learned:

          At the end of this discussion, I learn the following:

-      The difference of higher pleasures and lower pleasures

-      The Principle of Utility

-      Utilitarianism

-      Happiness

Integrative Questions:

1. Based on the Principle of Utility, what actions are considered right?
2. What actions are considered wrong?
3. What is the Greatest Happiness Principle?
4. Who is John Stuart Mill?
5. What are the kinds of pleasure?

Review Questions

1. State and explain the Principle of Utility. Show how it could be used to justify actions that are conventionally viewed as wrong, such as lying and stealing.

The Principle of Utility states that actions are right as long as it results to happiness while actions are wrong if it results to the opposite which is unhappiness. Lying and stealing are wrong basing it in the Principle of Utility because the Principle of Utility states that actions which bring unhappiness or sadness to people are wrong. Obviously, lying causes unhappiness because it questions of the trustworthiness of a person. On the part of the person being lied to, he would feel unhappy that the liar does not trust him enough to tell the truth. Meanwhile, stealing also causes unhappiness to other people for obvious reasons. Stealing takes away something very important to person. This something is closely attached to the person that when it is taken away from him, it makes him unhappy.  

2. How does Mill reply to the objection that Epicureanism is a doctrine worthy only of swine?

Mill said that it is degrading because a beast’s pleasure does not satisfy a human being’s conceptions of happiness. This means that a beast’s pleasure do not comply with what is considered as genuine happiness.

3. How does Mill distinguish between higher and lower pleasures?

The difference between the two is the amount of pleasure it gives or provides. The one with the higher pleasures requires or wants more to be happy than the one with the lower pleasures. This means that a person of higher pleasure is harder to be contented and satisfied in order to be happy unlike the latter one.

4. According to Mill, whose happiness must be considered?

Based on how I understood Mill’s discussion, the happiness of most people must be considered. This means that the happiness of most people is way more important and should be taken into consideration than one person alone.

5. Carefully reconstruct Mill’s proof of the Principle of Utility.

Mill stated, "Happines is desirable, and the only desirable, as an endl all other things being only desirable as means to that end." Based on how I understood this, this means that the only thing that is desirable is happiness and nothing else beyond that is desirable. 

Discussion Questions

1. Is happiness nothing more than pleasure, and the absence of pain? What do you think?

Honestly speaking, I do not consider happiness as mere pleasure and moreover the absence of pain. For me, happiness is something beyond pleasure and something which is immeasurable. In my opinion, happiness is a feeling and it cannot be described since it is a feeling. Though it may seem that happiness is indeed the absence of pain, I wouldn’t really say that happiness is the absence of pain because sometimes, pain causes us the happiness we are searching for. What I meant with this is that pain causes us to learn new things, to learn to stand up for ourselves and be stronger. If we are able to look at pain positively, I believe that it could lead to happiness.

2. Does Mill convince you that the so-called higher pleasures are better than the lower ones?

I wouldn’t really say that it convinced me higher pleasures, based on how I understood it means having standards which are high and hard to satisfy. In other words, higher pleasures call for more satisfaction and this also means that the person of higher pleasures is not contented with what he has. On the other hand, I wouldn’t say that I think lower pleasures are better because this means that the person does not aim high and regards himself lowly. For me, there has to be a balance between the higher and lower pleasures.

3. Mill says, “In the golden rule of Jesus of Nazareth, we read the complete spirit of the ethics of utility.” Is this true or not?

The golden rule of Jesus of Nazareth states that: “To do as you would be done by, and to love your neighbour as yourself.” I believe that this is true because Mill’s principle of utility is for one to cause happiness to other people which show his love for other people.

4. Many commentators have thought that Mill’s proof of the Principle of Utility is defective. Do you agree? If so, then what mistake or mistakes does he make? Is there any way to reformulate the proof so that it is not defective?

Honestly, I do agree with it being defective somehow. I believe that it is defective in a sense that he states that happiness can be gained by pleasure and the absence of pain. For me, if there’s no pain, happiness wouldn’t be such a big deal at all and it would actually become pointless as there is no difference in it. While in the presence of pain, we can distinguish happiness making it a very special feeling.

||Go Home||Read Next||Read Previous||