Deck 13: John Stuart Mill

Question 1

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?

Answer 1

No Answer

Question 2

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.

Answer 2

No Answer

Question 3

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?

Answer 3

No Answer

Question 4

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.
-Some have objected that applying utilitarianism would require difficult calculations, and would therefore be impractical. How does Mill respond to this objection? Do you find his response compelling?

Question 5

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 greatest happiness principle? On what does it make the rightness of our actions depend? Do you think it provides a reliable guide to our moral obligations? Why or why not?

Question 6

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.
-Of what kind of proof does Mill think that the greatest happiness principle is susceptible? How does he argue for the principle? Do you think his argument is sound? Defend your answer.

Question 7

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?

Question 8

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:

A) usefulness for some craft.
B) usefulness to society.
C) pleasure and the absence of pain.
D) the satisfaction of desire.

Question 9

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:

A) it is useful for some other end.
B) it is pleasurable in itself.
C) it is pleasurable in itself or is a means to the promotion of pleasure and prevention of pain.
D) it promotes the interests of all and does not harm anyone.

Question 10

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:

A) utilitarianism understands happiness to be a life of few pains and various pleasures, not a life of constant rapture.
B) even if happiness is impossible, the prevention and mitigation of unhappiness is not.
C) both a and b.
D) neither a nor b.

Question 11

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:

A) only the agent.
B) only the agent and those the agent cares about.
C) everyone, but weights the happiness of the agent more heavily.
D) everyone, and weights everyone's happiness equally.

Question 12

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:

A) the commands of God.
B) the threat of punishment.
C) the conscientious feelings of mankind.
D) the laws of Nature.

Question 13

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.

Question 14

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, no reason can be given why the general happiness is desirable, except:

A) each person desires his own happiness.
B) each person desires the general happiness.
C) it would be blamable not to.
D) it would be vicious not to.

Question 15

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:

A) is not desirable.
B) is desirable only as a means to one's own happiness.
C) is desirable only as a means to the happiness of others.
D) is desirable as part of one's happiness.

Question 16

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:

A) we face a genuine moral dilemma.
B) we should rely on our intuitions.
C) we should resort to the principle of utility.
D) there is no right answer concerning what we should do.

Question 17

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:

A) duty.
B) justice.
C) virtue.
D) supererogation.

Question 18

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:

A) it harms someone.
B) a person ought to be punished for it.
C) it violates a law of Nature.
D) it violates God's commands.

Question 19

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:

A) perfect and imperfect obligations.
B) positive and negative duties.
C) strong and weak duties.
D) absolute and relative obligations.

Question 20

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 Kant's universalizability test makes tacit use of utilitarian arguments.

Question 21

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, questions of ultimate ends are not amenable to proof.

Question 22

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.

Question 23

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.

Question 24

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.

Question 25

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 utilitarianism, whether an act is right or wrong depends on the motives of the agent.

Question 26

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.

Question 27

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.