He believes that the pleasure or pain a person feels is directly related to whether or not the action was right or wrong (Bentham, 39). This means that an action is right when it causes the greatest pleasure for the person or group of people who are involved. If there is a group of people and a certain action would benefit the majority of them for good, then it would be considered to be the right action. On the other hand, if the action does not benefit the majority and only benefits a few, then it would be considered to be wrong. The ultimate goal of this theory is to bring happiness to those involved and to also prevent evil and unhappiness within the group (Bentham, 39).
Bentham founded utilitarianism and developed the principle of adding pleasures and subtracting sufferings to promote a happy nation. However, one of the critics is that it only makes most people happy but leave a minority by itself. According to Eric Weiner, happiness is also a business of the government. Fifteen years
In Defense of Utilitarianism, J.S. Mill In the excerpt from John Stuart Mill’s book, Utilitarianism, Mill defends the utilitarian theory against three different objections. The first, and strongest opposition to utilitarianism was the accusation that the emphasis on the pursuit of pleasure makes utilitarianism “a doctrine worthy of swine.” This was my favorite argument because Mill defended it so well stating that there are varying degrees of pleasure. He refers to them as “high” and “low” pleasures, which I do agree with.
Theories that derived from these past two theories are the theory that develop over actions done by people and what they base their actions upon. A theory that can relate to this idea is “Utilitarianism” made by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill states that action are morally right and wrong depending on their effects that occur later. The only thing that really changes is the result of the that are produced from the choice. Utilitarianism is all based on cause and effect what we decide there will be an effect later on that will either right or wrong based on our decision. There was one philosopher who made clear that moral philosophy and every decision we made was for our happiness and was always no wrong choice.
Utilitarianism would look at this situation as a wrongful action. According to teleological created by John Stuart Mill the action that happens is based of the good that comes from said action. In this case Payne’s action while arresting Ms. Wobbles would go against teleological due to being negative in nature and doing more harm then good for either parties involved. According to Jeremy Bentham the goodness of the action is based on the consequences of the action that is made. I believe that Payne does deserve to be terminated from the department and rightfully tried in court for all the departmental policies that were broke during the arrest of Ms. Wobbles.
According to Aristotle, his definition of pleasure mean that the golden mean is our goal that we want to achieve in every action we make in life. However, we can also be easily get foolish by our action and achieve self-indulgent instead and goes to the excess category. Meanwhile, John Stuart Mill wrote in his Utilitarians’ that for someone to feel pleasure; mean there’s no pain involve also known as pleasure-acquisition, and we always aim for higher achievement to continuous feeling pleasure. Utilitarian belief that we not only seeking for pleasure in quantity but also quality, and only those who had experience both lower and higher pleasure can fully understand. Thus, I agree with Aristotle because I feels that pleasure is just an temporary
The Golden Rule Many philosophers have views on Ethics. The moral approaches of Kant, Mill, Aristotle, and Held are all vastly different. “Kant’s principle of morality is based on his belief that the means justifies the end” (O’Neil, Onora). Mill believes in Utilitarianism, believing that “one should act in a way that produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people” (Mill, John, 118).
The ethical theory of Utilitarianism provides a vague description of determining right actions from wrong actions as well as justification for why the particular actions are right, or wrong to begin with (Mill, 2008). Mills characteristics of Utilitarianism yields the greatest good for the greatest number, living not only by the general rule and what is expected. It reflects that doing the greatest good, in the long run, will have a more positive effect on individuals and give them a sense of respect. Inflicting excruciating pain on an animal is a characteristic that will not go over well with a member of an animal activist group; it is not displaying right for pleasure, but instead pain.
Mill stressed that individuals should be given the right to diversify and expand without conforming. To be brief, Mill did not want society to lose its diversity aspect because nobody would be happy in a uniform
According to Mill, humanly is capable of having higher pleasures as opposed to animals. These gratifications are more attractive and important than others (John, Utilitarian, 1861). Mill suggested criterion to assists in determining the happiness which is quantitative and precious. He suggested that if there might be an individual or some individuals with all or at least some pleasure and do have an experience when it come to making decision
According to Jeremy Bentham, and John Mill Stuart happiness to them comes from
Mill takes on the criticism that about happiness stating that human pleasures are better than animalistic pleasures and that when people are made aware of their higher faculties, they do want to accomplish them or don’t want to leave them uncultivated. A high-quality pleasure would be one that people would choose, even one that included discomfort, and would not trade it for a greater amount of another pleasure. A person who experiences higher faculties will often suffer more, but would not choose a lower existence, such as an animalistic one, as they would rather maintain their dignity. He writes, "It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.
A philosophy cannot be binding if it does not contain inherent consequences for those who break its rules. In this chapter, Mill says he will explore what built-in sanctions utilitarianism can provide; in other words, what punishments the philosophy might impose upon those who do not abide by it. Mill notes a potential challenge to the utilitarian system: if a person is presented with a first principle that general custom does not deem fundamental, that person will see no reason to respect or value that principle. Rather, the corollary moral ideas based on the first principle will seem to have a stronger foundation (because they enjoy general acceptance) than the foundation itself. Mill says that this challenge will simply persist for utilitarianism
In a critique of both the works, the paper adopts the Aristotelian thought citing that actions of human aims to fulfill goodness, which arguably is the happiness, one that arises from virtues practiced out of habit. Both the philosophers weigh in heavily on the role of happiness in the day to day lifestyles of humans. Adopting a sharp critic to the conventional principles of utility, Mill recognizes that happiness, as opposed to pleasure has a wider space in human attainments. He goes in deeper to explore the levels of pleasure
John Stuart Mill, at the very beginning of chapter 2 entitled “what is utilitarianism”. starts off by explaining to the readers what utility is, Utility is defined as pleasure itself, and the absence of pain. This leads us to another name for utility which is the greatest happiness principle. Mill claims that “actions are right in proportions as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” “By Happiness is intended pleasure and the absence of pain, by happiness, pain and the privation of pleasure”.
