Explain Mill 's account of quality of pleasure; how does he account differs from that of Bentham?
John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham are often said to have helped opposed views concerning the way “the value” of different pleasures should be projected. Mill is seen to be the individual who is an erratic utilitarian because he assumed that, when associating the value of two pleasures, we should not forget to take their “quality” into justification. Bentham, on the other hand, is said to have believed that we should take “only quantity” into consideration. This shows that when viewing the suggestions being made by both of the individuals, the word value, quantity, and quality all shows these claims are highly a fantasy and that the difference …show more content…
Pleasure itself can be compared quantitatively because there is no difference between them when viewing in the eyes of a human. Bentham speculates that quantity of pleasure being equal; push-pin is as good as poetry. This is basically saying that what is good and bad for each person is a matter for each person to decide by following the hedonic calculus. Meanwhile, Mill who is Bentham’s godson believes that happiness, no pleasure, should be standard of utility. As shown, on different resources on online slides, it mentions that Mill often agrees with Bentham in emphasizing that persons’ wellbeing is of the utmost importance. He also agreed with the utility principle, but had an issue with the quantitative element that Bentham incorporated. So, Mill decides to develop a system of higher and lower pleasures all together to make it a bit more soothing. Mill himself wants to reformulate the utilitarian theory to reflect the fact that pleasure are not all of equal value during the time, he also wanted to take human nature into account as well. Mill’s utilitarianism has been referred to as being eudemonistic utilitarianism as opposed to Bentham’s hedonistic utilitarianism. “The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utilitarianism, or the greatest happiness principle, hold that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness intended pleasure and absence of pain: by unhappiness, pain and privation of pleasure.” (Utilitarianism, Chapter 2) his gives a clear view of the moral standard set up by the theory, this includes the idea of pleasure and pain
John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham are often said to have helped opposed views concerning the way “the value” of different pleasures should be projected. Mill is seen to be the individual who is an erratic utilitarian because he assumed that, when associating the value of two pleasures, we should not forget to take their “quality” into justification. Bentham, on the other hand, is said to have believed that we should take “only quantity” into consideration. This shows that when viewing the suggestions being made by both of the individuals, the word value, quantity, and quality all shows these claims are highly a fantasy and that the difference …show more content…
Pleasure itself can be compared quantitatively because there is no difference between them when viewing in the eyes of a human. Bentham speculates that quantity of pleasure being equal; push-pin is as good as poetry. This is basically saying that what is good and bad for each person is a matter for each person to decide by following the hedonic calculus. Meanwhile, Mill who is Bentham’s godson believes that happiness, no pleasure, should be standard of utility. As shown, on different resources on online slides, it mentions that Mill often agrees with Bentham in emphasizing that persons’ wellbeing is of the utmost importance. He also agreed with the utility principle, but had an issue with the quantitative element that Bentham incorporated. So, Mill decides to develop a system of higher and lower pleasures all together to make it a bit more soothing. Mill himself wants to reformulate the utilitarian theory to reflect the fact that pleasure are not all of equal value during the time, he also wanted to take human nature into account as well. Mill’s utilitarianism has been referred to as being eudemonistic utilitarianism as opposed to Bentham’s hedonistic utilitarianism. “The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utilitarianism, or the greatest happiness principle, hold that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness intended pleasure and absence of pain: by unhappiness, pain and privation of pleasure.” (Utilitarianism, Chapter 2) his gives a clear view of the moral standard set up by the theory, this includes the idea of pleasure and pain