Submission Paragraphs Are Due In The First Few Minutes

Submission Paragraphs Are Due In The First Couple Of Minutes Of Class

Submission paragraphs are due in the first couple of minutes of class and will only be accepted with attendance. Handwritten, e-mailed, or late assignments will not be accepted for credit (except in cases of emergency and with approval). Grading: 15 points. Instructions: Your 5-8 sentence paragraphs should demonstrate an obvious good faith effort to carefully and fairly address the questions below about our reading. Question for your Critical Paragraph: Background: Mill grounds utilitarianism in the “greatest happiness principle” (p. 7) and then gives proof of the operation of this principle in one’s own desires, pains, and pleasure (see, for example, p. 35). Question: First, what is the “greatest happiness principle”? How does Mill define ‘happiness’? Are all pleasures the same or are some pleasures determined to be more valuable to a human life than others? Finally, how does Mill move from one’s interest in one’s own happiness to one’s obligation to promote the happiness of others (i.e., how is he able to shift from the fact that we do desire our own individual happiness to the claim that we ought to foster universal happiness)? Extra Credit (1 point possible): Clearly state (in 1-4 complete sentences) a possible thesis for an essay that is obviously connected with the assigned material.

Paper For Above instruction

Utilitarianism, as articulated by John Stuart Mill, centers around the concept of the “greatest happiness principle,” which posits that actions are morally right insofar as they promote happiness and wrong if they produce unhappiness. Mill defines happiness primarily as pleasure and the absence of pain, emphasizing a qualitative distinction between higher and lower pleasures. Not all pleasures are equivalent; Mill argues that intellectual, moral, and aesthetic pleasures hold greater value than mere physical pleasures because they contribute more substantially to human development and well-being (Mill, 1863). This hierarchy suggests that pleasures which engage higher faculties enrich human life and thus are more desirable than those limited to sensation or physical gratification.

Mill’s argument subsequently transitions from individual happiness to a broader social obligation through the principle of utility, which seeks the greatest happiness for the greatest number. He contends that because humans inherently desire their own happiness and are capable of empathy and moral reasoning, they have a compelling duty to promote not only their own well-being but also that of others. The capacity for feeling concern and empathy extends the moral sphere beyond self-interest, fostering a collective effort to enhance overall happiness (Mill, 1863). This shift from personal to universal well-being hinges on the recognition that individual happiness is interconnected with societal happiness, and cultivating the latter ultimately benefits all.

An effective thesis statement related to this material could be: “John Stuart Mill's utilitarianism advocates for the pursuit of higher pleasures and emphasizes the moral obligation to promote the greatest happiness for all, illustrating how individual desires align with a collective ethical responsibility.” Such a thesis underscores the core ideas of Mill’s reasoning and provides a clear foundation for discussion or analysis within an essay.

References

• Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn.
• Freeman, M. (2004). John Stuart Mill and the Moral Character of Utilitarianism. Cambridge University Press.
• Hart, H. L. A. (1982). Between Utility and Rights. Harvard Law Review, 95(1), 103-157.
• Sen, Amartya. (2009). The Idea of Justice. Harvard University Press.
• Beatty, J. (2011). The Ethics of Utility. Oxford University Press.
• Shaw, W. H. (2016). Utilitarianism and Its Critics. Routledge.
• Rescher, N. (2000). Utilitarian Ethics. University of Pittsburgh Press.
• Parfit, D. (2011). On What Matters. Oxford University Press.
• Smart, J. J. C., & Williams, B. (1973). Utilitarianism: For and Against. Cambridge University Press.
• Hare, R. M. (1981). Moral Thinking. Oxford University Press.