On Mill's Conception of Higher and Lower Pleasures
“Of two pleasures. If there be one to which all or almost all who have experience of both give a decided preference… that is the more desirable pleasure. Now it is an unquestionable fact that those who are equally acquainted with, and equally capable of appreciating and enjoying, both, do give a most marked preference to the manner of existence which employs their higher faculties… It is better to be a human being satisfied than a pig dissatisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.” -John Stuart Mill, “Utilitarianism”, ch. 2 "De gustibus et coloribus non est disputandum.” In John Stuart Mill’s treatise, Utilitarianism, the basic philosophical premise of his whole system of ethics is that, in a nut-shell, that which is good is determined by what brings the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people, or, as Mill put it, the Greatest Happiness Principle, as the basis for determining utility. Among the immediate problems this raises to any analysis is, of course, the difficulty in pinning down a rational, objective framework for determining happiness, which Mill equates early on with pleasure as “the only thing desirable as ends”. Mill spots this, and
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Kama Sutra, Coleridge Byron, Benjamin Gibbs, Happiness Principle, Aristotlewhom Mill, , Stuart Mills, Mill Utilitarianism, lower pleasures, Pleasures Philosophy, animal appetites, competent judges, kantian epistemology, lower pleasure, quality pleasures, John Stuart, people effectively evaluate, panel competent, physical hedonism, qualitative value, absolute people effectively, circumstance mills, quality pleasures evident, acquainted terms comparison, conceivable circumstance mills,
Approximate Word count = 2238
Approximate Pages = 9 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
 |
