Mill's Proof Of Utilitarianism

Question 1

What does Mill’s Proof of Utilitarianism aim to show?

Answer 1

Aims to defend hedonism and, by implication, the utility principle as the “first principle” of moral evaluation.

Question 2

What type of proof is Mill’s proof?

Answer 2

Mills proof is not a deductive proof
Instead he aims to provide evidence for the correctness of the utilitarian doctrine
He provides what we might call an evidential proof
That happiness is desired is evidence for it being good
There is no evidence that anything else is desired independently of happiness

Question 3

Structure of Mills proof

Answer 3

1) Happiness is a good, as is evident form the fact that everybody desires happiness
2) Each person’s happiness is a “good to that person”
3) The general Happiness is thus a good to the aggregate of all persons
=> preliminary conclusion from 1-3: Happiness is… one criteria of morality.
Last step: Happiness is the only good

Question 4

Controversial steps in Mill’s proof?

Answer 4

Naturalistic fallacy?
Fallacy of composition?
Implicit consequentialist premise?

Question 5

Does the proof involve a naturalistic fallacy?

Answer 5

Term from G.E. Moore
Is there an unjustified inference from “is desired” ( an empirical fact) to is “desirable” ( a normative judgement)?
- it follows from the definition of visible that if something is seen it is visible
it does not follow from the definition of desirable that if something is desired it is desirable

Question 6

Mills Response to Naturalistic fallacy?

Answer 6

Mill doesn’t say that happiness is desirable (a good) because it is desired

Only postulates that the evidence for whether or not something is a good is that it is desired

Question 7

Does the proof rest on a fallacy of composition?

Answer 7

Is there an unjustified inference from the value of each part of the general happiness (to someone to value of the whole (general happiness?

Question 8

Sidgwick’s fallacy of composition critique

Answer 8

An aggregate of actual desires, each directed towards a different part of the general happiness, does not constitute an actual desire for the general happiness
Difference between utilitarianism and egoism

Question 9

Possible reply by Mill to the composition fallacy

Answer 9

Mill is not trying to infer form “everyone desires their own happiness” that “everyone desires the general happiness”
Instead, Mill is defending Sum-ranking
I meant to argue that since A’s happiness is a good, B’s is a good, C’s is a good, etc, the sum of all these goods must be a good.

Question 10

Implicit consequentialist Premise

Answer 10

Consequentialism:
Morality is concerned with the promotion of the good
What is right is what brings about the best consequences
Mill slips from arguing that happiness is the highest good to claiming that what is right is what maximises happiness