FiltersDone

Question type

Essay

Multiple Choice

Short Answer

True False

Matching

Exam 13: John Stuart Mill

Show Answer

Share

---

All types

Filters

Study Flashcards

Question 1

True/False

Review LaterAdd Note

Review Later

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -Mill claims it is immoral to sacrifice one's own happiness for the happiness of others.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Question 2

Multiple Choice

Review LaterAdd Note

Review Later

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -Mill claims that the principle of utility:

A) can be proven from self-evident principles.
B) can be proven from principles that are known empirically.
C) cannot be proven, and this is a unique problem for the theory.
D) cannot be proven, but this is common to all first principles.

E) B) and C)
F) C) and D)

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Question 3

Multiple Choice

Review LaterAdd Note

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -In response to the objection that happiness is impossible to attain, Mill notes that:

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -Mill claims that one of the strongest objections to utilitarianism is drawn from the idea of:

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -According to Mill, the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility lies in:

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -According to Mill, to call an action wrong is to say that:

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -Mill defines "utility" as:

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -What is the only thing that is desirable for its own sake, according to Mill? How does he argue for this claim? Do you agree with him?

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -What does Mill claim is the "ultimate sanction" of the principle of utility, and what does he mean by this? Do you find his view plausible? Why or why not?

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -Mill argues that virtue:

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -What different things does Mill claim that people mean by the word justice? What role do considerations of justice play in utilitarianism? Does utilitarianism adequately account for the importance of justice?

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -According to Mill, something is desirable if and only if:

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -Utilitarianism requires that in deciding how to act, we think only of maximizing happiness.

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -Write an essay critically examining the greatest happiness principle as a guide to moral behavior. Explain the principle, and then state what you take to be the strongest objection to it. Can this objection be overcome? Defend your answer.

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -Mill argues that the golden rule is incompatible with utilitarianism.

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -According to Mill, to say someone has a right to something is to say that one has a valid claim on society to protect him in the possession of it.

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -Mill claims that when two rules of thumb conflict:

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -Utilitarianism takes into account the happiness of:

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -Mill claims that the distinction between justice and other moral obligations corresponds perfectly to the distinction between:

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism Mill defends the "greatest happiness principle," according to which "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." By happiness, Mill means pleasure and the absence of pain, which he argues are the only things desirable for their own sakes. Many objections have been raised to these views, and Mill addresses a number of them. In response to the complaint that setting pleasure as the highest good makes us no better than swine, Mill argues that pleasures differ not only in quantity, but also in quality; some pleasures are higher than others. Which pleasures are preferable, Mill claims, can be settled by the preferences of competent judges-those who have experienced both pleasures. In response to the objection that it is sometimes admirable to give up one's pleasure for the sake of others, Mill points out that this is compatible with utilitarianism, provided that the result of one's sacrifice is greater happiness for others. Mill argues that the ultimate sanction of the principle of utility comes not from an external source, but from the conscientious feelings of mankind. As the principle is a claim about the ultimate ends of our actions, Mill maintains that it is incapable of demonstrative proof. Nonetheless, some considerations can be presented in its favor. In particular, Mill argues that claims about ends are claims about what is desirable. Furthermore, the only way of proving that something is desirable is by showing that people actually desire it. Because happiness is the only thing that people desire for its own sake, we should accept that it is the only thing desirable for its own sake. Mill concludes with a discussion of the nature and role of justice within utilitarianism. -Mill claims that justice picks out certain classes of moral rules, which concern the essentials of human well-being.