John Stuart Mill And Utilitarianism

632 Words3 Pages

CHAPTER - 1
INTRODUCTION
Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the best moral action is the one that maximizes utility. Utility is defined in various ways, but is usually related to the well-being of sentient entities. Originally, Jeremy Bentham, the founder of Utilitarianism, defined utility as the aggregate pleasure after deducting distress of all concerned in any action. John Stuart Mill expanded this concept of utility to include not only the quantity, but quality of pleasure, while focusing on rules, instead of individual moral actions. Others have rejected that contentment has positive value and have advocated negative utilitarianism, which defines utility only in terms of suffering. As opposed to this riotous view, …show more content…

Representatives of this concept were all over in Europe, for example, Helvetius in France and Baccaria in Itlay, but in real, the base of Utilitarianism was laid in English and its famous presentators were from England and Scattland, for example, John Gay, William Paley, Jeremy Bentham, James Mill, J.S. Mill and David Hume for a limit. The word 'Utilitarianism' is used for ethical, political improvements and activities. From the political point of view, the aim of the Utilitarianism was to bring social reform and to provide high level living for less rich people. This not only wanted to provide grasping facilities but also wanted to make them self respected by providing the opportunities of …show more content…

But some types of utilitarianism recognize morally right actions with doing some acceptable or satisfactory amount of good as in satisfying types of utilitarianism. Alternatively, some types strive to create dispositions or motives that generally promote, but not necessarily maximize, happiness, or focus on avoiding actions that cause pain and suffering.
William Shaw (1999) claims that, “Two fundamental ideas underlie utilitarianism: first, that results of our actions are the key to moral evaluation, and second, that one should review or compare those results in terms of the happiness they cause or, more broadly, in terms of their impact on people’s