Morality is governed by Consequences of Behavior
John Stuart Mill Article Summary

In these few pages taken from the first two chapters of Utilitarianism, Mill points out that his essay will attempt to add to the understanding of utilitarianism and to present some kind of proof of it as a moral theory. As Mill states, utilitarianism cannot “ be proven in the ordinary and popular meaning of the term”, since it is not possible to prove questions concerning ultimate ends. Rather, the only statements that could be proven to be valid are those that lead to other statements that we accept to be valid. This does not mean, however, that we should judge first principles randomly. Instead, we should evaluate them rationally.
Mill notices that there are many people who misunderstand utilitarianism by interpreting utility as in opposition to pleasure. On the contrary, utility is defined as pleasure itself and the absence of pain. The Great Happiness Principle holds that “actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness”. He goes on to state that the term happiness refers to pleasure and absence of pain and the term unhappiness to pain itself and the absence of pleasure. Therefore, pleasure and the absence of pain are the only things desirable as ends. So any other event, action or experience is desirable, only because it is pleasure in itself or it is simply a source for such pleasure i.e. it helps in promoting pleasure.
Mill goes on to criticize those who reduce the meaning of life to pleasure only, as being submissive and demeaning. He goes on to explain that such a claim assumes “ human beings to be capable of no pleasures except those of which swine are capable” . On the contrary, Mill believes that human pleasures are much superior than those of animals. Their faculties are more elevated than animal appetites. And once people are made aware of such faculties, they will never be happy to leave them unfulfilled; thus to be happy we need to exercise our higher faculties. Some pleasures, he says, are more desirable and valuable than others. Therefore Mill believes that it would be “absurd” to take into account just the quantity when making a moral judgment on action. Rather he believes that both quantity and quality should be considered.
Mill then explains how one should differentiate between the qualities of pleasure and how one pleasure could be more valuable than another. A pleasure is superior to another if people would choose it over the other pleasure even if it causes discomfort, and also if they would not trade for a greater amount of the other pleasure. He also states that people who are familiar with both pleasures, will prefer those that appeal to their higher faculties. Even though a person who uses higher faculties is prone to more suffering in life than one who uses lower faculties. A person of higher faculties would be unwilling to choose a lower existence, preferring to maintain his dignity and pride instead.
Another misconception about utilitarianism originates from the confusion of happiness and content. It is certain that those whose capacities of enjoyment are low, have a greater chance of having them satisfied than those who employ higher faculties. However those who employ higher faculties have a pleasure that is of a higher character than that of an animal or a ‘base’ human. Mill believes that a person best qualified to judge a pleasure’s quality is one who “knows both sides”, i.e. has

experienced both the higher and the lower pleasure and thus has had sufficient experience to be able to give a preference. In addition, Mill believes men do not voluntarily choose inferior pleasures. Instead the only reason they would addict themselves to such pleasures is because they are probably the only ones to which they have access , or simply because they are incapable of the other superior pleasures.
Furthermore, Mill observes that even if the possession of a "noble character" brought less happiness to the individual, society would still benefit. Why? Because the Greatest Happiness Principle considers the total amount of happiness and not only the person’s own happiness. It tends to promote utility of the general public and minimize pain. Thus, a noble character, even if it is less desirable for the individual, is still desirable by a utilitarian standard.