Mill’s Utilitarianism

Mill’s concept of utilitarianism morals is based off of the consequences of the moral choices in question. Although his search for pleasure is often mistaken for typical Hedonism, he means to strive for an overall contempt life, through hardship. Most hedonism is selfish, and focuses on the pleasures of just yourself, whereas Mill wants something akin to a democratic hedonism. He wants for everyone to be as happy as they can with the help of everyone else. He ranks these hapinesses by quality, the high and low pleasures. The low pleasures are the ones that come easy, like sex, whereas the high pleasures may be family or hard work in life. The utilitarianist way is not based around seeking pleasure sexually, but around being happy with your life in it’s whole with the high pleasures being a big reason in contemptment of your life. Hedonism is based more to the lower pleasures and still avoids pain, but can focus on the more literal form of happiness as well. Mill’s concept rejects the focus on the low pleasure and emphasizes the high pleasure as what defines what is moral or immoral.

Mill’s reasons to support the Greatest Happiness Principle are to support the greater good with the “intended pleasure, and the absence of pain,” for their happiness rather than only your own happiness.

The pig in this philosophy is something looked down upon, a creature who lives life only knowing the lower pleasures and without our knowledge as humans. It is happy, but unaware of the world around it, and thus is compared to a fool. “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied” is to say that we would rather live with our knowledge and happiness in this world rather than a pig’s life. The pig is not an intellectual, and enjoys a humble life knowing next to nothing but it’s instincts, though when compared to hedonism, Mill is speaking of a deeper happiness based on accomplishment of yourself and community. To call it a “pig philosophy” is wrong on many levels, even the connotations of a ‘pig’ today twist the concept into something darker. His mentions of the pig are used to refer to someone who only and solely focuses on those lower pleasures.

Although sometimes humans chasing the higher pleasure wander off into the low pleasure, Mill understands this and is not surprised. He explains how some “pursue sensual indulgences to the injury of health, though perfectly aware that health is the greater good.” The greater good is almost never immediate, and Mill is aware of this, and aware that sometimes humans need that quick pleasure to keep from being so displeased. Pleasure in Mill’s thoughts are something humans can’t wait forever for, and that needs to be nourished in order to survive.

I’m conflicted with Mill’s utilitarianism, although it is thought provoking and in some cases seen in life, I can’t agree with the tyranny the majority has. That kind of a community will plow through the minorities in those situations, and it will stomp out the motivation to make the greater good happy once the other side is no longer held to the same level. Although I agree that I would rather live my sad life than be a rich man’s cat or a pig doesn’t mean it’s because I want the higher pleasures, I want that to keep consciousness and because I wouldn’t trade my life for a better one, if I get lucky I can make it better myself. To call the pig and fool ignorant leaves such a weird taste in my mouth, I think his comparisons are not very well thought out and that the air around the subject is taken as almost an insult to someone who may not be able to live as Mill did, with knowledge he could attain. I think there are greater and lesser pleasures in life and that I am happy I can experience the greater ones, and I can see that some of his concepts are reflected in real life, but his attitude and the tyranny of the majority are why I don’t support his assessment.

Word Count: 678