Mill, Why Are Some Pleasures More Worthwhile Than Others?

An action is morally required in utilitarianism if it maximizes happiness for the greatest amount of people. Morality is based on the presence of pleasure, and the absence of pain. However, Mill categorizes pleasures into lower animal pleasures and higher human pleasures. Only humans can experience higher human pleasures uniquely but they can also experience lower animal pleasures as well. Mill argues that higher human pleasures significantly contribute

Utilitarianism, in the contrary, is based on the principle of utility or usefulness. Utility is what encourages an agent to act in a particular way (Tuckett, 1998). Utility can be explained as maximizing the good like pleasure and happiness and minimizing the bad like pain and evil, all leading to the greater good for all parties involved. It weights the consequences of the actions equally between the ones involved, and the ethical solution would be to follow the greater good for most if not all the parties involved.

Edwards' innocence was stolen during the course of the film, this was done to show how cruel people are and how people take advantage of those who may not understand. At the start of the movie, Edward struggled with communication and social norms from lack of human interaction and at the end, he did all he could to avoid it. He now knew too much about how people can be, and would rather be alone. Tim Burton used lighting and costume to show Edwards' loss of innocence. In the scene where Joyce assaulted Edward, she took her clothes off willingly, she was showing her true self and showing vulnerability while forcing Edward to do the same.

The doctrine of utilitarianism is based on the principle of utility. Utilitarianism is mainly characterized by two elements; happiness and consequentialism. Utilitarian happiness is the biggest joy which every human being looks for in life. In utilitarianism everything useful to happiness is good. Therefore, the name of Utility is found in everything which contributes to the happiness of every rational being. The criterion of right and wrong is balanced between individual's happiness and the happiness of the entire community, "each counting in a balanced way". Consequentialism in utilitarianism is based on the fact that an action must be judged by its consequences on the happiness of the largest number. That is: my search for

I agree with the main components of Rule Utilitarianism. I find it natural for it to be plausible, and it is well designed to that very fact. I also find favor with the element of fairness, that a decision is for the benefit of a group rather than partial to only the individual himself. The system of itself is very clear, you greatest quality of happiness, or pleasure. It also isn’t as arbitrary as Act Utilitarianism, but still allows for modifications and adaptations.

One might say, however, that some things are desired as a means to happiness. These, he says, are ‘ingredients’ to happiness. Happiness consists of these ‘ingredients’; they are a part of the happiness. Therefore, Mill claims that whatever is desired for its own sake is part of what happiness is, and each individual person desires different things to make them happy. They are means to the end of happiness. It is not possible, according to Mill, to desire something that will not provide some form of pleasure. Pleasure is happiness, and people only desire happiness, and happiness is therefore the only good.

How does one, for example, compare the admiration of a painting to the admiration of music? Mill goes on to state that utilitarianism is not concerned as much with the pleasure of the individual as it is with the pleasure of society in general. He observes the objection that this demands a motivation to promote the greatest happiness for all, but counters by removing motivation from the picture. Utilitarianism is not concerned with motivations, but with ends. Another objection concerns the inability to determine all possible outcomes of all possible choices in a given situation. Mill means to apply utilitarianism to rules, not to individual situations (unless a precedent has not been established). Mill also responds to a number of objections which are unanswerable by many philosophies, including utilitarianism's godlessness, the infirmities of human nature, and whether happiness is attainable or necessary. Mill only states that these objections apply equally well to other philosophies, and does not directly address them.

Mill disagreed that "it is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied," meaning, human dissatisfaction is superior to animal satisfaction, or more clearer stated as "better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied". This means the fool would simply be of a different view because he did not know both sides of the question. This statement means that Mill has rejected the identification of the concept "happiness" and replaced it with "pleasure and the absence of pain" and rejected the concept "unhappiness" and replaced it with "pain and the absence of pleasure." Even though his point was based on the maximization of happiness, he showed the differences between pleasures that are higher and lower in quality.

In fact, differences in the quality of a pleasure must be considered as well as differences in quantity. Mill argues that differences in quality are to be measured in preferences rather than quality. "Of two pleasures, if there be one to which all or almost all who have experience of both give a decided preference, irrespective of any feeling of moral obligation to prefer it, that is the more desirable pleasure."6

Rule utilitarianism creates rules that would lead to the general overall happiness of individuals involved and an act is said to be moral when it conforms to those rule. This would mean that an act can be moral in accordance with rule utilitarianism even if the action does not bring about overall happiness, but just because it conformed to a rule that, if the circumstances were different, would have brought about overall happiness.

The goal of an act utilitarian is to maximize a person’s overall happiness in the universe. With an act utilitarian the goal will be to “Maximize pleasure and minimize pain” (Waller, 2005, p.49). An act utilitarian says that people could do that and they would not only make everyone happier but they would also be doing what is morally right. An act utilitarian doesn’t have conflicts over any action being right or wrong.

John Stuart Mill adds more arguments to Bentham’s view of Utilitarianism, which are important factors to consider when discussing this topic. Utilitarianism is the idea to promote the greatest happiness to the general society as opposed to oneself (Mill, 114). Each pleasure is said to have its own difference in quality, so people are able to make the choice between two pleasures (115). Mill believes mental pleasures reign more important than bodily pleasures seeing that bodily pleasures are seen as inferior to the greater good (115). It takes a higher grade of pleasures to make a human satisfied and pleased. “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied” (116). An important factor for choosing higher pleasures over inferior pleasures is that you only have time for one pleasure and if you chose the inferior pleasure it will be wasted (117). However the standards of what is right and wrong are not decided by the person’s own happiness but the happiness of everyone who is concerned in the decision (117). Being a Utilitarian forces you to stay an

The pursuit of pleasure has also been condemned by critics as being little more than the promotion of one’s own interests, with no regard to the happiness of others. Mill disputes this as being narrow-minded, clarifying that the pleasure principle which forms the foundation for utilitarianism, “what is right in conduct, is not the agent's own happiness, but that of all concerned” (Mill 16). With this acknowledgment, however, comes the criticism that people cannot possibly be motivated by something as satisfying the collective good of society. Mill countered this by pointing out, “The utilitarian morality does recognize in human beings the power of sacrificing their own greatest good for the good of others” (Mill 16). To the objection that pleasure is an acceptable end is contrary to Christian principles because it is “godless,” Mill states, “If it be a true belief that God desires, above all things, the happiness of his creatures, and that this was his purpose in their creation, utility is not only not a godless doctrine, but more profoundly religious than any other” (Mill 21).

One major point of contention, however, is that it is often difficult, if not impossible, to measure and compare the values of certain benefits and costs. How does one assign value to human life, or time, or artistic pleasures such as literature and music? Mill's response was to introduce variables to pleasure. While Bentham concentrated on quantity (the pleasure's duration, intensity, etc), Mill stressed quality. Adding the feature of quality to pleasure differentiates “ higher”, intellectual pleasures from common, physical ones. He argues in his famous quote “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is only because they only know their own side of the question”. This reasoning is not very satisfactory if we consider how subjective (and elitist) it can be. Who is to determine which activities are more high-brow or low-brow, and what makes a competent judge? Mill states it should be person who has experience of the activities in question, but a key aspect of utilitarianism it the requirement of making these judgements impartially and impersonally. With the diversity of this world it is highly unlikely that the tastes and preferences will all align in accord. Even if we attempt to make our decisions based on how others would be affected, it is impossible for us to know or measure the

anything else. Human nature is such that if a person achieved pure happiness, that person