Compare And Contrast John Stuart Mill And Utilitarianism

864 Words 4 Pages
John Stuart Mill is a philosopher who believes that ethics deals with obligations. He feels it has nothing to do with facts,science, but more on how one should act. He puts forth a supreme principle through obligation that he wants one to follow based on law. This opened up the door to exploring .how utilitarianism is different from ethical theories. There are two differences that play an important distinct role with other philosophers. Mill defends his Utilitarianism theory no matter what the outcome is. He wants people to see that even though there are objections to his ideology, he still imposes the ideas for utilitarianism.

At eighteen, Mill had a breakdown so he turned to working on poetry, however there were no philosophers at the time to help. He learned that education consists of the neck up and the world
…show more content…
Pleasure brings about the GHP. It is promoted by consequential ethics. It is an action that is being made by the person seeking pleasure. This shows that if one is not pleasured then is it really in line with GHP or are the people with or around you causing unpleasurable events. There is always a reason, a new obligation, that has to be met in order to create the GHP. This idea is based solely on the principle one needs to work on whatever makes you happy. It’s based on the idea that their greatest happiness comes first. There are many objections raised against utilitarianism's GHP. The objections are that the GHP doesn’t tell one where their happiness lies, another is it doesn't give us all of our obligations and the lastly, it is concerned more with experiencing then with justice. The needs of happiness ought weigh the needs of the all for a few that aren’t happy. This philosophy goes against the a moral theory. It brings you back to the case of is it morally permissible to break a promise if it determines one’s

Related Documents