The Principle Of Moralism In John Stuart Miller's Utilitarianism

Great Essays
John Stuart Mill, in Utilitarianism, explains his principle of utility and its importance to morality. Bernard Williams challenges Mill’s views by utilizing thought experiments and is ultimately successful in undermining some forms of utilitarianism. The principle of utility, according to Mill, is the idea that actions must produce the most happiness possible. Pain and the privation of pleasure are the direct opposites of Mill’s argument for the principle of utility, or his “First Principle.” Furthermore, Mill is concerned about the end goals of our actions and how we can achieve them. He argues that since most sciences are not based on first principles, morality, “a practical art,” requires for the necessity of a first principle because …show more content…
Consider for example, a relatively young man, George, who recently completed his Doctor of Philosophy in Chemistry. He is happily married with two children, but he himself is rather ill and thus has trouble finding a job. His wife works, but at the expense of their children, who are neglected as a result. It seems that the family’s dire circumstances are about to change as George is offered a position in a laboratory. The job pays very well, but involves the creation of biological and chemical weapons, which George is extremely opposed to. However, if George fails to accept the position, an another chemist will surely welcome the new position with great enthusiasm and passion and most likely speed up the production of such deadly weapons. George’s wife has no exception since the family clearly needs the money. Ultimately, should George accept the job and help his family even though he loses his integrity in the process or let a passionate and seemingly dangerous chemist accept the position while saving his own …show more content…
If he refuses, only the more passionate chemist will be happy and perhaps some advocates of such warfare, but if George takes the job, his family would benefit tremendously, but at his expense. George’s guilt or integrity is not calculated at all in Mill’s utilitarian calculus, only the net happiness is focuses upon. Simply, a utilitarian approach removes the individual from their own moral integrity at the expense of other’s “happiness.” One’s identity is surely more important than the relative pleasure of strangers. Additionally, complete responsibility is placed on the individual refusing to act, George in this case. Why should he solely be accountable for the well-being of others? Mill explains that there is a natural duty of humans to help each other and the fear of displeasing God, but there is still necessarily no clear evidence that we must strive for aggregate happiness to achieve those goals. Even so, if George is to calculate each alternative, as a proper utilitarian, and weigh the net happiness of each action then he has the ability to place the value of his own happiness above other’s. Therefore, if George values his moral integrity and happiness above that of his family and the supposed passionate chemist, he has the complete right to not accept the job and still please the utilitarian

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    The following paper critically assesses the applications of John Stuart Mill’s philosophy of utilitarianism. Through analyzing a notorious criticism of his doctrine, I will argue that utilitarianism is a reasonable moral philosophy, as while it is concerned with maximizing overall happiness, it still acknowledges the motivations of individual actors. This paper will: consider the problem of distributive justice, argue why it fails to acknowledge his emphasis on personal dignity and private interest, and then assert why utility is a worthy end for an ethical doctrine. The foundation of Mill's ethic is the principle of utility, which dictates that an action is right to the extent that it causes happiness, and wrong insofar as it causes…

    • 1243 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    It is believed that it is too strict a requirement for Utilitarianism to imply that we should always act solely to maximize happiness. It is then asking too much of people to be always centrally focused on promoting happiness for the general human population. Mill responds to such criticism by stating that “…no system of ethics requires that the sole motive of all we do shall be a feeling of duty,” but rather that “utilitarian moralists have gone beyond almost everyone in asserting that the motive has nothing to do with the morality of the action though it has much to do with the worth of the agent.” (13) This therefore, asserts that the motives behind an action will have nothing to do with whether or not we should complete an action solely based on its morality. He states that the great majority of these good actions are intended not for the benefit of the world, but for that of its…

    • 1497 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Rather, he values the importance of success, which ultimately leads to goodness. If a leader were to rely solely on his morals, his mind would be clouded with unreasonable and unattainable duties. Learning to set morality to the side allows for the liberation of mind and action while ridding one’s thought of virtuous restrictions. When deception acts as a mediator between virtuous behavior and rational thought, one learns that the only “good” that matters is a derived form of…

    • 1948 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Some strengths of qualitative utilitarianism are that it does take into account natural human desires and gives them weight in order to help make an ethical decision (Wilkens, 2011). Utilitarianism’s goal is to promote goodness and happiness and focuses on how no individual’s happiness is more valuable than that of any other. Unfortunately, not everyone has the same definition of goodness. This is the key flaw in utilitarianism because like in the example of man trapped in the electrical hub, it can be skewed by number of people it may affect. Another flaw in utilitarianism is that it does not take into account justice or laws of any kind.…

    • 1063 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Aristotle states that moral virtues are not inherent sources of reason but can be influenced by reason to aid in the acquisition of happiness. Hobbes believes that moral virtues are dispositions that are influenced by reason to make men more inclined to avoid returning to a state of nature. Hobbes makes the most compelling arguments mainly due to his pragmatism and understanding of the nature of man. His argument against an objective good thoroughly debunks the pomposity of Aristotle 's argument for ultimate happiness and the contemplative life because it applies more broadly to mankind. It is true that we desire goods for other goods but that does not necessarily mean that our desire is, in turn, vain and empty; it simply means that we are ambitious creatures that remain hungry for new input.…

    • 1409 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Rule Utilitarianism still portrays that maximising one’s well-being is the most important, although the method differs from Bentham’s. Rule Utilitarianism is self-explanatory in that it states that we should all follow the rules which will maximise people’s well-being ‘actions are right in proportion 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 unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure.’(Mill,1861). This set of rules can both be moral rules and guidance but also political rules which help governments decide on laws and policies which will maximise the citizen’s well-being and happiness. Rules such as keeping your promises can help maximise another’s well-being but raises the question of whether it could become a universal rule which is followed by all.…

    • 2365 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Utilitarianism and Kantianism take polarizing views on what we, as humans, should define as morally valuable and morally correct. In this paper, I will argue that Utilitarianism undermines the humanity principle and Kantianism illuminates necessary values when determining action. Additionally, I will argue that both ideologies do fall short when determining in a general sense what is morally valuable. Before arguing for my thesis, however, I will explain both Mill and Kant’s theories respectively. Then I will present a case that tests the plausibility of the two theories and offer what I take to be the best response in the case from the perspective of the individual involved.…

    • 1728 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    This is based on the Utilitarian principle that one should act towards the greatest good for the greatest number of people. This promotes happiness and pleasure while condemning anything that causes pain. Mill believes that the purpose for any person’s actions is to experience pleasure or to avoid pain. Though this ultimate telos for happiness may seem like a good system, there are flaws that do not coincide with human nature. One issue with this theory is that it does not take into consideration that different people have different preferences and ideas of what is pleasurable.…

    • 1510 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    To Kant, the proprietors of self love make a category mistake by basing their viewpoint on empirical psychology; happiness is contingent and therefore are not capable of being commandments of reason (Kant 329). Imposing empirical principles for morality is dangerous because the unconditional purity of the prescription is ruined; the will can no longer behave autonomously (Kant 340). This is because reason is a priori and necessary. For Kant, the idea of an a priori power of reason that determines the will precedes all contingent, empirical factors; this will must apply to all possible rational beings (324). The psychology of human beings is irrelevant in the question of the existence of a morality based off of…

    • 775 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Acting in a particular way to seem popular and impress others can really get inside your head and ruin you. Achieving true happiness must be made by true success and effort. In Death of a Salesman, Willy does the opposite. Willy believes popularity brings more to the table than work and effort. Willy’s obsession with wealth, success, and popularity really prevent him from being truly happy.…

    • 1318 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays

Related Topics