Mill’s Utilitarianism is a seemingly simple yet quixotic approach to the issue of what makes a moral action. Mill believes that the goodness of a moral action depends on the amount of happiness it creates. However, critics find issue with this principle because if the end result of maximizing happiness is all that matters, unjust actions such as murder are moral as long as they maximize happiness. Despite his efforts of ameliorating this problem with his concept of justice, his use of justice is inherently flawed. As a result, while his principle of Utilitarianism sounds great in reality, it fundamentally falls short in application. In this paper, I will first illustrate what Mill means by Utilitarianism and how he uses justice to expand it.
…show more content…
By happiness is intended pleasure, and is the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain in the privation of pleasure.” The greatest happiness principle can also be restated as the greater the good produced, the more moral the action. He then extrapolates on what he means be happiness by defining it as pleasure in the absence of pain. Happiness and pleasure in Mill’s mind are synonymous, and he believes people strive to maximize the pleasure or happiness of society. This maximization of happiness is also defined as utility. The ultimate goal for a Utilitarian is to maximize utility, or the overall happiness of …show more content…
In Utilitarianism, Mill believes justice is a feeling where people are inclined to act accordingly to what should be the law. Mill describes this feeling as an intrinsic instinct that everyone shares. He further elaborates on this sentiment by saying that it is a desire to punish those who have done wrong and feel the need retaliate. He relates his concept of justice to utility by explaining that the reason why people feel the desire to punish the perpetrators is because their unjust acts hurt the general happiness of society. This addition to Utilitarianism helps respond to the criticism that Utilitarianism condones wrongful actions. Although he never responded directly to the issue of unjust actions, through the entailments of his concept, one can respond to the pizza man dilemma by saying that if everyone murdered one innocent in the name of saving others, murder will be normalized. If murder was normalized, then people will feel more comfortable with murder, and could murder in less extreme
By happiness is intended pleasure, and is the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain in the privation of pleasure.” The greatest happiness principle can also be restated as the greater the good produced, the more moral the action. He then extrapolates on what he means be happiness by defining it as pleasure in the absence of pain. Happiness and pleasure in Mill’s mind are synonymous, and he believes people strive to maximize the pleasure or happiness of society. This maximization of happiness is also defined as utility. The ultimate goal for a Utilitarian is to maximize utility, or the overall happiness of …show more content…
In Utilitarianism, Mill believes justice is a feeling where people are inclined to act accordingly to what should be the law. Mill describes this feeling as an intrinsic instinct that everyone shares. He further elaborates on this sentiment by saying that it is a desire to punish those who have done wrong and feel the need retaliate. He relates his concept of justice to utility by explaining that the reason why people feel the desire to punish the perpetrators is because their unjust acts hurt the general happiness of society. This addition to Utilitarianism helps respond to the criticism that Utilitarianism condones wrongful actions. Although he never responded directly to the issue of unjust actions, through the entailments of his concept, one can respond to the pizza man dilemma by saying that if everyone murdered one innocent in the name of saving others, murder will be normalized. If murder was normalized, then people will feel more comfortable with murder, and could murder in less extreme