John Stuart Mill proposed the following argument for utilitarianism: "No reason can be given why the general happiness is desirable, except that each person, so far as he believes it to be attainable, desires his own happiness." The argument
A) violates Hume's is-ought thesis.
B) would be valid if we were to add the following bridge premise: "If everyone desires X, then X is desirable."
C) would be valid if we were to add the following bridge premise: "If at least one person desires X, then X is desirable."
D) All of the above

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

John Stuart Mill's argument for utilitarianism suggests that the general happiness is desirable because each person desires their own happiness. This argument does indeed violate Hume's is-ought thesis, which posits that one cannot derive an "ought" from an "is," meaning you cannot conclude what should be the case based solely on what is the case. Mill's argument moves from a descriptive claim about what people desire (an "is") to a normative claim about what is desirable (an "ought"). Adding either bridge premise B ("If everyone desires X, then X is desirable.") or C ("If at least one person desires X, then X is desirable.") would attempt to provide a logical foundation for moving from descriptive to normative claims, thus making the argument valid. However, both premises still face the challenge posed by Hume's is-ought thesis, as they attempt to derive normative conclusions from descriptive premises.

John Stuart Mill Proposed the Following Argument for Utilitarianism: "No