Arbella Stuart

The utilitarianism ethical theory, according to John Stuart Mill, states that “happiness is desirable, and the only thing desirable, as an end; all other things being desirable as a means to that end” (Mill 35). Although this ethical theory seems logical on its surface, a closer examination of its key components paints a different picture. Because of its flawed definition of “happiness” and mischaracterization of human nature, one should be discouraged from using the utilitarian ethical theory

torture the right thing to do? Let’s take a look at some of the reviews of those that are skilled professionals in discussing if it is just or permissible to use torture. John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant are philosophers who stand by and argue their beliefs on what is right and wrong with the use of torture. John Stuart Mill states the right actions are those which produce the greatest amount of happiness (or prevent the greatest amount of unhappiness) for all sentient creatures, where by happiness

In J.S. Mills’ essay, he gets right to the point of a principle which he deems to be very easy to follow. This is called the Hurt Principle which states “That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.” In other words, a person can choose what they do as long as it doesn’t harm someone else, society has not right to stop him. Unfortunately for me, Mills never gives a definition of what harm

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, Utilitarianism is defined as a doctrine in which the greatest happiness of the greatest number should be the guiding principle of conduct. John Stuart Mill theorized that that happiness and pleasure are multi-dimensional ways of feeling thus there are different qualities associated with happiness. In this respect, Mill hypothesized that higher and lower pleasures exist within the human experience. Higher pleasures nourish the intellect they consist of reading

The truth of an opinion is hardly ever questioned when so many people attest of its authenticity, and even when questioned it is improbable that it can be amended if only a few people are of the opposite opinion. In On Liberty, John Stuart Mill remarks that this tyranny of the majority arises when the majority begins to execute its own mandates over the minority whether these mandates are right or wrong, so long as the majority agrees to it, the rest will have to abide by it. As a result, the minority’s

Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill are two well-known ethical philosophers that came forward and shared their beliefs to the world. These two philosophers came about at roughly the same time, but both have different philosophies about what to do in an ethical dilemma. Kant focuses on the morality of duty and good will. On the other hand, Mill is dedicated to a utilitarian mindset, meaning that the greatest happiness for the greatest amount (Solomon & Murphy, 2000). In an ethical dilemma, Kant and

Utilitarianism is an ethical theory which was first introduced by Epicurus in the 3rd Century BC and more famously developed by Jeremy Bentham. The theory focuses on the idea of pleasure and happiness for the majority. Bentham’s theory was further developed by J.S.Mill and Peter Singer, and in turn Rule and Preference Utilitarianism were developed. During this essay, I will be focusing on the rights of life and liberty, in relation to this theory. Whilst I agree with the above statement because

In the Principles of Political Economy, John Stuart Mill limits the power of bequest with an inheritance policy intended to diminish societal inequalities. Caught in the tension between private property and its limitations, Mill limits the amount an inheritor can receive instead of restricting the amount an owner of property can bequeath. Mill preserves the principle of private property by not restricting the bequeather. He writes: “Bequest is one of the attributes of property. The ownership of

Argumentative Essay Happiness is when someone is joyful and enjoys life right? John Stuart Mill disagrees and says that you can not be self-conscious and attain happiness. He also stated that the pursuit of happiness is not itself. I disagree with John Stuart Mill’s theory of happiness. The reason I do not agree is because I believe that happiness is what you enjoy not anyone else. For example, in the article, he states that if you let your “self-consciousness exhaust themselves” you will

Reading Reflection #2: John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism In John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism, he implements consequential ethics. Mill's utilitarianism conjoins three claims: 1, the morally right action is the one that maximizes aggregate good, 2, what is good is the happiness of individual humans (and other sentient creatures), and 3, happiness consists in pleasure and the absence of pain (Mill). Mill also explains the General Happiness Principle, in which (1) actions are ‘right’ in proportion