John Stuart Mill Essay

Stemming from the 19th century, a group of British philosophers, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill formed a set of basic principles to address social problems in England. Jeremy Bentham was inspired by the ideas of hedonism where happiness is equated to pleasure, thus he de developed a system of Utility Calculus. One of his followers, John Stuart Mill, however was dissatisfied, so he redeveloped the system into what is largely known today as the classic ethical theory of “Utilitarianism.” Utilitarianism

Mill’s Thoughts on Capital Punishment In John Stuart Mills speech on capital punishment, he expresses his favor of the preservation capital punishment for murder and thoroughly defends his position. Mill bases his belief on the proposal that he death penalty is the most effective deterrent on criminal behavior, he believes it is the most human way of treating criminals who commit murder, and it increases the sum total of happiness. Mill states that human action should adhere to the “greatest-happiness

using the works of “Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals” by Immanuel Kant and “What Utilitarianism Is” by John Stuart Mill. Immanuel Kant was a philosopher who believed that nothing in this world can be conceived as good except goodwill. John Mill was a philosopher that said that it does not matter the intention as long as there is a benefit. In this paper I will be arguing Kant over Mill. Immanuel Kant was a German philosopher (then it was Prussia) who believed that nothing in the world could

In John Stuart Mill’s book, Utilitarianism (1863) he challenges many critics that are against his theory. One of which is the claim that Utilitarianism is a swine doctrine. They interpret the theory by saying a humans ultimate goal in life, is that of a swine; pleasure in the absence of pain. It is quite an understandable remark, but definitely is an over analyzed critique, in my opinion. Mill however replies to the critics in grave detail, defending his theory. Although many strengths and weaknesses

thought beliefs and action of the individuals? The 19th century philosopher, John Stuart mill thought this question to be on monumental importance. In his famous work on liberty written over a century ago, Mill predicted that such a question “Is likely to recognize itself s the vital question of the future”. Given the ubiquity of the state tyranny in the 20th century and the threats to liberty that loom over our heads today, Mills prediction seems to have come true. As it is well know to people, Governments

3. Mill on Custom Consider the freedom of action. Given Mill’s description of individual freedoms, it seems that one is free to do whatever action that they want, so long as it does not affect other people. This includes following custom, if they so desire, and is not necessarily an evil. For instance, if it is customary for women to wear dresses, then for a woman to wear a dress would be a typical and non-harmful thing to do. Obviously, if the action compelled by custom is one that would negatively

in the form of society’s power over an individual (Mill, 1). In this paper, I argue that Mill’s Utilitarianism cannot be reconciled with On Liberty on the basis of contradicting principles in both books and the visible tensions between the defense of individual liberty and the promotion of the utility principle. In fact, the contradiction lies in the notion of the greatest happiness principle versus individual rights. To begin with, although Mill states in On Liberty that he considers “utility as

John Stuart Mill was an English philosopher that believed in utilitarianism. Per utilitarianism, the source of moral duty comes from the consequences of an action. Mill is known for his Greatest Happiness Principle, which says actions are right when they promote the “greatest happiness” to the greatest number of people. Whether Mill’s statement is right or wrong is debatable. In the general sense, his statement seems logical. Doing what will make a greater number of people happy is what we should

Assisted Suicide According to Mill Many people throughout the world are diagnosed with a terminally ill disease, meaning their disease is not curable and they are given a short period to live. Take Brittany Maynard for example. She was diagnosed with brain cancer at the age of 29 and had two surgeries to prevent the tumor from growing. Months later she found out her tumor came back, was more aggressive, and she was given six months to live. Doctors suggested another surgery, but after reading the

Rae Langton and John Stuart Mill were both philosophers who attempted to address the similar topic of freedom of speech. In On Liberty, Mill proposed that speech and actions are separate things and that even negative speech should be included. He claims that it has extrinsic value and the suppression of a minority is immoral. Langton opposes that in Speech Acts and Unspeakable Acts, and argues that cases like pornography demonstrate that some kinds of speech can silence other speech. She defends