MILL'S UTILITARIANISM

UG HUNAHUNA SA
USA KA TAGA MINNDANAO

Maayong hapon sa tanan.

Kining akong himoon karon, usa lang ni ka pasi‐ugna, aron sulayan nato
pagtan‐aw ang Mindanao ug ang dagan sa iyang hunahuna sumala sa atong
nakita ug nasinati. Preliminary lang gyud. Ang sige man nako madungog sa
mga ingon ani na adunay hisgutanan mao lang ang national na panglantaw.
Sugdan nato pagtugi ang panglantaw na Mindanao kung ha‐om ba kini sa mga
hunahuna ni John Stuart Mill ang iyang pilosofiya na Utilitarianism.

Simple lang jud ning akong presentation karong hapona. Daghang pang
basahonan mahitungod sa mga ubang scholars nga nagsulat mahitungod kay
John Stuart Mill. Sa sunod na na sila.

Tungod kay daghang studyante karon naminaw ug classroom gihapon ang

atong paglantaw aning atong gibuhat, busa saksak‐sinagol ang language na
gamiton ko ‐ ma‐english man, usahay tagawog ug adunay cebuano.

1
 Ang Utilitarianism isip usa ka ethical theory naga‐argue kini na ang
goodness of pleasure and the determination of right behavior are based on the
usefulness of the action’s consequences.

1
Ang Utilitarianism naga-claim that one’s
actions and behavior are good kung
kining duha are directed toward the
experience of the greatest pleasure
over pain for the greatest number
of persons.

This means that pleasure is good and that the goodness of an action is
determined by its usefulness. Kung ipunon kining mga ideas, mao kini ang
mogawas, ang utilitarianism naga‐claim that one’s actions and behavior are
good kung kining duha are directed toward the experience of the greatest
pleasure over pain for the greatest number of persons.

2
“Utility” refers to the usefulness of the
consequences of one’s action and
behavior. Action and behavior are
utilitarian because some individual rights
can be sacrificed for the sake of the
greater happiness of the many.

Tandaan nato na the root word is “utility,” which refers to the usefulness of
the consequences of one’s action and behavior. Action and behavior are
utilitarian because some individual rights can be sacrificed for the sake of the
greater happiness of the many.

BALIKON NAKO:

Utility for J.S. Mill, refers to a way of understanding the results of people’s
actions. Specifically, he is interested on whether these actions contribute or
not to the total amount of resulting happiness in the world. The utilitarian
value pleasure and happiness; this means that the usefulness of actions is
based on its promotion of happiness. Mill understands happiness as the
experience of pleasure for the greatest number of persons, even at the
expense of some individual’s rights.

3
THE PRINCIPLE OF UTILITY
Miingon si Mill na what makes people happy is
intended pleasure and what makes people not happy
is the privation of pleasure. Unsa to maka-mugna o
maka-produce ug happiness and pleasure are good.
Unya katong maka-produce ug opposite - kasakit,
unhappiness and pain - mao to ang bad.

THE PRINCIPLE OF UTILITY

Mill’s principle of utility reiterates that moral good as happiness and,

consequently, happiness as pleasure.
Miingon si Mill na what makes people happy is
intended pleasure and what makes people not happy
is the privation of pleasure. Unsa to maka‐mugna o
maka‐produce ug happiness and pleasure are good.
Unya katong maka‐produce ug opposite ‐ kasakit,
unhappiness and pain ‐ mao to ang bad.

Mill clarifies that what makes people happy is intended pleasure and
what makes us unhappy is the privation of pleasure. The things that produce
happiness and pleasure are good; whereas, those that produce unhappiness
and pain are bad.

4
Mill explains, it is because they are inherently pleasurable in themselves or
they eventually lead to the promotion of pleasure and the avoidance of pain.

4
 Miingon si JS Mill na

THE PRINCIPLE OF UTILITY

is the only principle in
assessing an action’s morality.

This is not only important principles – they are in fact the only principle in
assessing an action’s morality.

5
 I

HAPPINESS
IN
UTILITY RESULT OF THE
ACTION WORLD

Pwede tayo magtanong:

1. Why is it justifiable to wiretap private conversations in instances of

treason, rebellion, espionage, and sedition?
2. Why is it preferable to alleviate poverty or eliminate criminality? 3. Why
is it noble to build schools and hospitals?
4.Why is it good to improve the quality of life and the like?
5. Why should we be concerned with climate change?

There is no other answer than the principle of utility, that is, to increase
happiness and decrease pain.

6
 Mill argues that QUALITY OF
PLEASURE is more
preferable than
QUANTITY OF
PLEASURE.

Mill thinks that the principle of utility must distinguish pleasures qualitatively
and not merely quantitatively. For Mill, utilitarianism cannot promote the kind
of pleasures appropriate to pigs or to any other animals. He thinks that there
are higher intellectual and lower base pleasures. We, as moral agents, are
capable of searching and desiring higher intellectual pleasures more than pigs
are capable of. We undermine ourselves if we only and primarily desire
sensuality; this is because we are capable of higher intellectual pleasurable
goods. For Mill, crude bestial pleasures, which are appropriate for animals,
are degrading to us because we are by nature not easily satisfied by pleasures
only for pigs. Human pleasures are qualitatively different from animal
pleasures. It is unfair to assume that we merely pursue pleasures appropriate
for beasts even if there are instances when we choose to pursue such base
pleasures. But Mill also recognizes the empirical fact that there are different
kinds of pleasures.

Mill argues that quality is more preferable than quantity.

7
 It is better to be a human dissatisfied
than a pig satisfied;
better to be Socrates dissatisfied
than a fool satisfied.

READ: this is the famous Mill’s line:

It is better to be a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied;
better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if
the fool, or the pig, is of a different opinion, it is because they
only know their own side of the question. The other party to
the comparison knows both sides.

Kung basahon nato ug lawom‐lawom kining gisulti ni Mill, morag dili siya
makita diri sa Mindanao?

Madali intindihon ang comparison of pig and human kay layo ra man jud ang
baboy sa tawo. Ang lisod pag within sa tawo lang. Ang kalipay sa tawo ay
kalipay na within grasp lang sa tawo. Paglayo kaayo ang domain sa kalipay sa
kasinati‐an sa tawo, dili ma‐grasp na sa tawo ug dili na ma‐enjoy sa tawo.
Lisod kaayo tungkaron ang kalipay na quality ni JSMill. Unsa ba jud na siya?

8
 Ang pakighugoy‐hugoy sa katawhan, sa kaparyentehan, sa silingan.
Mao na ang pinaka‐quality nga kalipay sa tawo nga nakita ko diri sa
Mindanao. Wala koy nakita o nasinati nga kalipay na siya lang, masulob‐on
ang description niana. Kinahanglan ma‐share mo sa uban. Mao nga aduna
nakitay tarpulin, streamers sa among panahon, certificate na ibutang sa
frame. Pag‐itago na nimo ‐ lahi na ang mensahe niana.

What is quality of pleasure ang tinutukoy ni Mill?

Exmple, naka‐graduate ang imong anak sa engineering magna

cumlaude ug number one the board exam, My OMG, ang nanay ug tatay,
magpabuhat ug pinka‐nindot na tarpulin ug ibaladra sa atubangan ug sa likod
sa balay.

Due to this discussion, I remember Lanao del Sur na puno sa mga

streamers ug tarpulin. Negative ang reaction ko noon, everytime dumaan ako
diyan pero ngayon I am beginning to see another light doon sa mga streamers.

I remember my mother noon. After sa recognition ceremonies sa

school and after pinning my medal on me. We walked pauwi sa amin. Kaya na
gud ng 20 minutes lakarin, pero aabot kami ng 1.5 hrs kasi dadaanan pa niya
ang kanyang friends and they were talking about me and my medal for that
year. Hindi lang once, meron pang repeat performance the next day and so
on. Yong kalipay na yon, hindi yon pasado kay MILL? Unsa kaha to na quality?
Baka underdevelop pa jud ang sense quality happiness sa mga tao sa
Mindanao?

Dili man sad to sensual na kalipay? Lower happiness? What could be

higher than that?

Ang kaya nato ma‐grasp na kalipay kanang duol sa atong kasinatian‐

easily ma‐grasp. Joy, happiness is something that one can easily grasp.

8
MILL'S QUALITY OF HAPPINESS is
centered on the individual.

In MINDANAO, happiness is shared

with others, the wider the domain,
parang joy grows in a wider space.

EXPLAIN THE SLIDE

While it is difficult to understand how Mill was able to compare swinish

pleasures with human ones, we can presume that it would be better to be
Socrates dissatisfied than a pig satisfied. Simply put, as human beings, we
prefer the pleasures that are actually within our grasp. It is easy to compare
extreme types of pleasures as in the case of pigs and humans, but it is difficult
to compare pleasures deeply integrated in our way of life. The pleasures of an
Ilonggo eating chicken inasal/batchoy and an Igorot eating pinikpikan is an
example. This cannot be done by simply tasting inasal/batchoy or pinikpikan.
In the same way, some people prefer puto to bibingka or liking for the music
of Eraserheads than that of the APO Hiking Society.

9
 PRINCIPLE OF THE GREATEST NUMBER

The goodness or the badness of an action is based

on whether it is useful in contributing to a specific
purpose for the greatest number of people, even
at the expense of some individual's rights.

PRINCIPLE OF THE GREATEST NUMBER

Equating happiness with pleasure does not aim to describe the

utilitarian moral agent alone and independently from others. This is not only
about our individual pleasures, regardless of how high, intellectual, or in other
ways noble it is, but it is also about the pleasure of the greatest number
affected by the consequences of our actions.

10
Utilitarianism could only attain
its end by the general
cultivation of nobleness of
others, and his own ....

11
Utilitarianism cannot lead to selfish acts.
If we are the only ones who are made happy by
our actions, then we cannot be morally good.

In this sense, utilitarianism is not dismissive of

sacrifices that procure more happiness for others.

Utilitarianism cannot lead to selfish acts. It is neither

about our pleasure nor happiness alone; it cannot be
all about us. If we are the only ones who are made
happy by our actions, then we cannot be morally
good. In this sense, utilitarianism is not dismissive of
sacrifices that procure more happiness for others.

12
Therefore, it is necessary for us
to consider everyone’s happiness,
including our own, as the standard
by which to evaluate what is moral.

Therefore, it is necessary for us to consider

everyone’s happiness, including our own, as the
standard by which to evaluate what is moral. Also, it
implies that utilitarianism is not at all separate from
liberal social practices that aim to improve the
quality of life for all persons. Utilitarianism is
interested with everyone’s happiness, in fact the
greatest happiness of the greatest number. Mill
identifies the eradication of disease, using
technology, and other practical ways as examples of
utilitarianism.

13
Utilitarianism maximizes the total
amount of pleasure over displeasure
for the greatest number. Because of the
premium given to the consequences of
actions, Mill pushes for the moral
irrelevance of motive in evaluating
actions

Consequently, utilitarianism maximizes the total

amount of pleasure over displeasure for the greatest
number. Because of the premium given to the
consequences of actions, Mill pushes for the moral
irrelevance of motive in evaluating actions.

Utilitarianism is interested with the best

consequence for the highest number of people.

14
Mill's Utilitarianism is not interested with
the intention of the agent. Moral value
cannot be discernible in the intention or
motivation of the person doing the act;
it is based solely and exclusively on
the difference it makes on the world’s
total amount of pleasure and pain.

It is not interested with the intention of the agent.

Moral value cannot be discernible in the intention or
motivation of the person doing the act; it is based
solely and exclusively on the difference it makes on
the world’s total amount of pleasure and pain.
This leads us to question utilitarianism’s take of
moral rights.

15
If actions are based only on the
greatest happiness of the greatest
number, is it justifiable to let go
of some rights for the sake of
the benefit of the majority?

If actions are based only on the greatest happiness

of the greatest number, is it justifiable to let go of
some rights for the sake of the benefit of the
majority?

Kani na question, magpabalik sa daghan kwento sa

mga lumad at moro sa Mindanao. Mo-flash back.
Sasabihin ng students ko - first characteristic of
moral standard. This part of the ideas of Mill does
not sit well with Minndanao.

16
INDIVIDUAL
SOCIETY
THINKING COMMUNITY
PERSON HUMANITY

17
 IKAW NA INDIVIDUAL

PAMILYA

NASOD NA PILIPINAS

18