Mill's Utilitarianism

Question 1

what is mill’s main argument for utilitarianism?

Answer 1

actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to
produce the reverse of happiness

happiness (or pleasure) is the only thing that is inherently valuable, and everything else is valuable only because it leads to happiness.

happiness = intended pleasure and the absence of pain
○
unhappiness = pain and the absence of pleasure
P1: Pleasure and freedom from pain are the only desirable ends (hedonism)
●
○
thinks this is true because of intuition
○

Question 2

Why does Mill think pleasure and freedom from pain are the only desirable ends?

Answer 2

3 things

1. intuition
2. the argument from great personal sacrifice (Mill’s reductio)
   ■ what else but the absence of pleasure and pain would justify great
   personal sacrifice
3. claim that pleasure and freedom from pain are the only things that we infact
   desire—a claim about what our desires are

Question 3

what is mill’s reductio?

Answer 3

if happiness is not the only good, then immense personal sacrifices must be justified by something other than happiness, which is not the case.

RP1: If happiness (understood as pleasure) is not the only thing that is good in itself, then the hero must have something else that could justify their sacrifice
○
RP2: but nothing other than other people’s happiness could justify immense
personal sacrifice
○
C: pleasure and freedom from are the only desirable ends

Question 4

how can one respond to mill’s reductio?

Answer 4

a plausible concrete conception of human dignity, you have to motivate concretly this idea that there are ends other than pleasure and freedom from pain that matter.

Question 5

what is the dignity objection (to utilitarianism)?

Answer 5

This objection argues that if pleasure is the only good, it reduces human dignity to that of animals, suggesting a lack of higher moral purpose.
P1: If pleasure and freedom from pain are the only desirable ends, then human nature is no more dignified than animal nature.
P2: Human nature is more dignified than animal nature, leading to the conclusion that pleasure and freedom from pain cannot be the only desirable ends.

Mills response: P1 can’t be true, premise 1 is true iff human pleasure and animal
pleasure are the same, but they’re not the same—human pleasure is better
pleasure

Question 6

what is the motivation objection to utilitarianism?

Answer 6

This objection states that moral acts do not need to be motivated by the desire to maximize well-being, challenging the utilitarian framework.
P1: If utilitarianism is true, then an act is morally right if motivated by the desire to maximize well-being.
P2: However, moral acts can be motivated by other factors, leading to the conclusion that utilitarianism is false.doesn’t utilitarianism say that humans should ONLY pursue pleasure, and the
only thing WORTH prusing is pleasure, which makes humans no better than pigs,
gluttonous and undignified? isn’t there more to humans than that?(an objection
to P1)

Question 7

what is the demandingness objection to utilitarianism?

Answer 7

we are always moraoly obligated to act to maximize net pleasure and bring about
a state that maximizes net pleasure
■ this just seems like a lot: hence, demanding!