Mill: The Greatest Happiness Principle

John Stuart Mill

● Most important philosophical contribution: System of Logic
● Mill defends the inductive method of logic
○ General laws or universal principles must be derived from empirical facts
● Did not attempt to originate an ethical theory, but rather to defend the ethical theory to which he was born
● Had an intense desire to find an ethics which fits the facts of life, thus leading him to modify and go
beyond the Utilitarian doctrine
● Jeremy Bentham
○ Utilitarianism was less important as an ethical system than as a philosophical support for social
legislation
○ Public good ought to be the object of the legislator: General utility ought to be the foundation of
his reasonings
○ Hedonistic calculus: means of which pleasures and pains could be measured; good and bad acts can
be evaluated in terms of such factors as intensity, duration, and extent
● Mill is concerned less with the political implications of Bentham’s doctrine than with the provision of a
defensible statement of its underlying ethical principles
○ Answered objections by opponents of Utilitarianism
○ Corrected misrepresentations of it
○ Restated the Utilitarianism doctrine
● In his restatement:
○ Pleasures and pains are also subject to significant qualitative differentiation (not only quantitative)
○ Example: pleasure upon the resolution of an intellectual problem is superior to pleasure of eating a
meal
○ Experiences like solving intellectual problems (higher faculties) offer superior pleasure compared to
more basic pleasures
● Mill accepts in principle his doctrines regarding basic role of pleasures and pains in morality, namely:
○ Individual psychological hedonism
■ Sole motive of an action is an individual’s desire for happiness
■ Balance pleasure over pain
■ An account of the actual motive behind actions; descriptive doctrine
○ Universal ethical hedonism
■ The “greatest happiness of the greatest number” ought to be the individual’s goal and
standard of conduct
■ Standard for morality = greatest happiness of the greatest number
■ Normative theory → what ought to be done
■ Actions are evaluated in terms of their consequences, regardless of the nature of the motive
● Two gaps between individual psychological hedonism and universal ethical hedonism:
○ If individuals are solely motivated by their own happiness, there is no guarantee their actions will
always benefit society
■ “There is no reason to assume that personal actions will at the same time always promote
the interest of society”
■ Tries to address by the concept of sanctions (incentives for following moral rules)
○ Acknowledging that people desire their own happiness doesn’t automatically imply they are ought
to act in accordance with this desire
■ “Descriptive fact that people do desire their own happiness does not imply the normative
principle that people ought to act in accordance with this desire”
■ No consensus on whether this has been bridged
● Adequate defense of Utilitarianism shows how the transition can be made from:
○ An interest in one’s own happiness to that of others
○ Psychological theory to a moral theory
● Sanctions
 ○ Serve as the mechanisms through which moral rules are reinforced and followed
○ Based on hedonistic motive → individuals adhere to moral principles in anticipation of pleasure or
pain
■ Hedonistic ~ pleasure and pain; pleasurable sensations that are the ultimately valuable
thing
● External sanctions
○ Involve punishments and rewards in society
○ Forces of punishments and rewards that control people’s actions through their fear of pain and
propensity for pleasure
○ E.g., fear of social disapproval and imprisonment

“Conformity to the letter of the law in the presence of such external sanctions is not to be taken as a sign of true sense of
moral obligation: the ultimate moral sanction must come from within.”

● Internal sanctions
○ Stem from the feeling of pleasure of obeying moral laws and pain of violating them
○ True moral obligation comes from within
○ Some individuals feel a strong sense of sympathy for others, to the extent that their own happiness is
tied to the well-being of others
■ Thus, by means of the doctrine of internal sanctions, Mill is enabled to reconcile the
psychological theory that people desire their own happiness with the moral theory that one
ought to act to serve the public good
● Argument in support of sanctions does not constitute a logical demonstration of the greatest happiness
principle
○ Argues that no direct proof of any first principle or ultimate end is possible
○ Problem of proof is reduced to the problem of rational assent
● Logical proof of the greatest happiness principle
○ The only evidence for something being desirable (e.g., general happiness) is that people actually
desire it
○ The acknowledgement and pursuit of the general happiness stem from the individuals’ desires for
their personal happiness
● Mill focuses on consequences of actions
○ Utilitarians are consequentialists who believe that pleasure is the only intrinsic value
○ View of theory of life was monistic: there is only one thing that is intrinsically desirable (i.e.,
pleasure)

#1 Clarifying the Doctrine

● Common misunderstandings
○ Utility or the Greatest Happiness Principle is opposed to pleasure
○ Actions are right if they promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people
○ Utilitarian implies the rejection of pleasure or frivolity
○ Rejection of pleasure in some of its forms; of beauty, of ornament, or of amusement
○ Superiority to frivolity and mere pleasures of the moment

#2 Doctrine of Utility
● Utility holds that morally right actions are in proportion to their tendency to promote happiness
○ Wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness
● Happiness = pleasure and absence of pain
● Unhappiness = pain and deprivation of pleasure
● Pleasure and freedom of pain are the only things desirable as ends
○ Desirable things → desirable either for the pleasure inherent in themselves, or as means to the
promotion of pleasure and prevention of pain
● Utilitarianism holds that pleasure and the avoidance of pain are the only intrinsic goods
● All other desirable things are either valuable because they bring pleasure or serve as means to promote pleasure
and prevent pain

#3 Pleasures Vary in Kind

as well as in Degree
● Introduction to Epicurean Philosophy
○ Some individuals, even those with noble intentions, harbor a deep aversion to the notion that life's
purpose is solely pleasure-seeking.
○ Critics view this perspective as degrading, likening it to the base desires of animals like swine.
● Epicurean Defense
○ Epicureans argue against the degrading portrayal, asserting that it's the accusers who diminish
human nature by assuming humans are only capable of animalistic pleasures.
○ If the sources of pleasure were precisely the same to human beings and to swine, the rule of life
which is good enough for the one would be good enough for the other.
○ Degrading because a beast’s pleasures do not satisfy a human being’s conception of happiness
○ They highlight that human faculties transcend mere animal instincts, necessitating higher
forms of gratification for true happiness.
● Value of Intellectual and Moral Pleasures
○ Epicurean philosophy, while not without flaws, acknowledges the significance of intellectual,
emotional, and moral pleasures alongside bodily ones.
○ These pleasures are considered of much greater value due to their intrinsic nature, which aligns with
human faculties beyond mere sensation.
● Utilitarian Perspective
○ Utilitarian writers, including Epicureans, emphasize the circumstantial advantages of mental
pleasures such as permanency, safety, and low cost.
○ While they effectively argue for these advantages, they could also argue for the inherent
superiority of certain pleasures based on their quality, not just quantity.
● Recognition of Pleasure Hierarchy
○ It's rational within utilitarianism to acknowledge that some pleasures hold greater desirability and
value than others.
○ Quality should be considered alongside quantity in evaluating pleasures, consistent with how
other things are assessed.

#4 Competent Judges Prefer the Pleasures of Higher Faculties to Those of the Lower
● Definition of Quality in Pleasures
○ Quality in pleasures is determined not solely by quantity but by the preference of those experienced
in both pleasures.
○ A pleasure is deemed more valuable if it's preferred by most, even if it comes with discontent, over
another pleasure.
● Preference for Higher Faculties
○ Individuals with equal capacity to appreciate both types of pleasures overwhelmingly prefer
activities engaging their higher faculties.
○ Most wouldn't trade their intellectual, moral, or emotional capacities for the simpler
pleasures of animals.
● Unwillingness to Descend in Existence
○ Despite potential for greater suffering, beings with higher faculties never wish to regress to a
lower state of existence.
■ “If they ever fancy they would, it is only in cases of unhappiness so extreme, that to escape
from it they would exchange their lot for almost any other, however undesirable in their
own eyes.”
 A being of higher faculties requires more to make him happy, is capable probably of more acute suffering, and certainly
accessible to it at more points, than one of an inferior type; but in spite of these liabilities, he can never really wish to sink
into what he feels to be a lower grade of existence.

○ This unwillingness is attributed to various factors like pride, love of liberty, power, or excitement,
but fundamentally stems from a sense of dignity.
● Sense of Dignity
○ Dignity is inherent in all human beings to varying degrees, closely tied to their higher faculties.
○ It's essential for happiness, as conflicting with it would only momentarily satisfy desires.
● Distinction Between Happiness and Contentment
○ Whoever supposes that the superior being is not happier than the inferior confounds the two very
different ideas of happiness and content.
○ Lower beings may have their limited desires more easily satisfied, but higher beings, despite
imperfections, can bear them and find a deeper sense of fulfillment.
■ Can bear imperfections as long as bearable; they may choose to regress when they want to
escape already
○ Highly endowed being will always feel that any happiness which he can look for is imperfect.
○ It's better to be a dissatisfied human than a satisfied animal; better to be a dissatisfied Socrates than a
satisfied fool or pig.
● Understanding Both Perspectives
○ Those advocating for simpler pleasures may do so because they're unaware of the complexities
and depth of higher faculties.
○ Socrates' dissatisfaction, rooted in his understanding of both kinds of existence, is deemed superior
to the fool's contentment, which lacks such awareness.

#5 Competent Judges Have Tested the

Entire Spectrum of Pleasures
● Postponement of Higher Pleasures
○ Individuals, despite understanding the intrinsic superiority of higher pleasures, may yield to
temptation and opt for lower pleasures.
○ This occurs due to weakness of character, where the immediate gratification of bodily pleasures is
prioritized over long-term benefits.
● Transition to Lower Pleasures
○ Some, initially enthusiastic about noble pursuits, may later succumb to indolence and selfishness.
○ This transition isn't a deliberate choice but a consequence of neglecting the cultivation of
higher capacities over time.
● Diminished Capacity for Higher Pleasures
○ Many lose their capacity for noble feelings due to lack of nourishment and exposure to societal
influences.

In the majority of young persons, the capacity for nobler feelings speedily dies away if the occupations to which their position
in life has devoted them and the society into which it has thrown them are not favorable to keeping that higher capacity in
exercise.

○ Limited time and opportunities lead individuals to indulge in inferior pleasures, not because they
prefer them, but because they no longer have access to or can appreciate higher ones.
● Inability to Combine Both Pleasure Classes
○ While some attempt to merge both classes of pleasures, few can maintain equal susceptibility to
both.
○ The majority fail in this attempt, unable to balance the demands of higher and lower pleasures.
● Verdict of Competent Judges
○ The judgment of those experienced in both types of pleasures, or that of the majority among them,
is considered final in determining the worth of pleasures.
 ○ Since there's no other reliable authority, their judgment on pleasure quality holds significance.
○ Pain is always heterogeneous with pleasure
● Determining Pleasure Worth
○ Quantifying the intensity of pains and pleasures relies on the collective judgment of those familiar
with both.
○ Pleasures derived from higher faculties are deemed superior in kind, regardless of intensity,
compared to those stemming solely from the animal nature.

#6 Quantitative and Qualitative

Aspects of Pleasure
● Utility as Directive Rule
○ Utility or happiness serves as the guiding principle for human conduct.
○ While noble character isn't necessary for accepting utilitarianism, it greatly contributes to overall
happiness of society.
● Benefit of Nobleness of Character
○ Nobleness of character benefits others and enriches society, even if it doesn't always directly increase
an individual's own happiness.
■ World in general is immensely a gainer by it
○ Utilitarianism aims for the general cultivation of noble character for the greater good, even if
individual happiness is only a deduction from the collective benefit.
● Ultimate End of Utilitarianism
○ The Greatest Happiness Principle states that the ultimate end is an existence with minimal pain and
maximum enjoyment in both quantity and quality.
○ Quality is assessed based on the preferences of those best equipped to compare experiences, habits,
and self-awareness.
● Standard of Morality
○ Utilitarianism views morality as the set of rules guiding human conduct toward maximizing
happiness and minimizing pain for all sentient beings.
○ It aims to secure such an existence for humanity and, to the extent possible, for the entire sentient
creation.

#7 Realistic Description of Happiness

Objection: Utilitarianism is invalid because happiness cannot be attained.
● Definition of Happiness
○ Happiness isn't a continuous state of intense pleasure but consists of moments of exalted enjoyment
amidst a life with few and transient pains, many varied pleasures, and a predominance of active over
passive experiences.
○ True happiness is found in realizing the limitations of life and not expecting more from it
than it can provide.
● Attainability of Happiness
○ Many individuals have lived lives worthy of the name of happiness, characterized by tranquility,
excitement, and contentment with modest pleasures.
○ Current societal constraints, such as poor education and social arrangements, hinder widespread
attainment of such happiness.
● Components of a Satisfied Life
○ Tranquility and excitement are the main components of a satisfied life, with either being sufficient
on its own for many individuals.

With much tranquility, many find that they can be content with very little pleasure: with much excitement, many can
reconcile themselves to a considerable quantity of pain.

○ The two are not mutually exclusive but rather complement each other, with each preparing for and
enhancing the other.
 ● Causes of Unsatisfactory Life
○ Selfishness and want of mental cultivation are the primary causes of an unsatisfactory life.
○ Individuals lacking in personal or collective affections find life's excitements diminished, especially
as death approaches.
○ Mental cultivation, regardless of philosophical depth, opens up sources of inexhaustible interest in
various aspects of life, including nature, art, literature, history, and human prospects.

#8 Actions of Self-Sacrifice
Objection: Utilitarian morality is incompatible with the acts of personal sacrifice, which are so revered in
Christian culture.
● Morality of Self-Devotion
○ Utilitarians claim the morality of self-devotion as rightfully belonging to them, akin to the Stoic or
Transcendentalist principles.
○ While recognizing the power of sacrificing one's own good for others, utilitarianism denies that the
sacrifice itself is inherently good.
● Utilitarian Standard of Sacrifice
○ Utilitarianism views sacrifice as meaningful only if it increases or tends to increase the total
happiness. Otherwise, it is considered as wasted.
○ It applauds self-renunciation or self-sacrifice that is devoted to the happiness or means of happiness
of others, within the bounds of collective interests.
● Impartiality in Happiness
○ The happiness that serves as the utilitarian standard of conduct is not the agent's own but that of all
involved.
○ Utilitarianism requires strict impartiality between one's own happiness and that of others, as
exemplified in the golden rule and love for one's neighbor.
■ To do as one would be done by, and to love one’s neighbor as oneself
● Ethics of Utility and Ideal Perfection
○ The golden rule encapsulates the spirit of utilitarian ethics: to treat others as one would wish to be
treated and to love one's neighbor as oneself.
○ Utility advocates for laws and social arrangements that align individual happiness with the common
good, as well as education and opinion that instill a strong association between personal happiness
and the welfare of all.
● Recommendations for Utilitarian Morality
○ If critics understood utilitarianism in its true character, they would find it difficult to pinpoint any
lacking recommendation compared to other moralities.
○ Utilitarianism fosters beautiful and exalted developments of human nature, promoting habitual
motives of action geared towards promoting the general good.

#9 Greatest Happiness Principle as the Rule by Which Conduct is Judged and Sanctioned
● Distinction Between Rule of Action and Motive
○ Ethics determine duties and provide a test to identify them but don't mandate that all actions be
motivated solely by duty.
○ While ethics outline what we ought to do, motives behind actions vary, with many actions being
rightfully done for reasons other than duty.
● Role of Motive in Morality
○ Utilitarian moralists emphasize that the morality of an action is independent of the motive behind it
but influences the worth of the agent.
○ Saving a person from drowning is morally right regardless of the motive, while betraying trust is a
crime irrespective of the motive.
● Utilitarian Perspective on Motive
○ Utilitarianism doesn't require individuals to constantly focus on promoting the general interests of
society.
 ○ Most good actions aim to benefit specific individuals, with the aggregate of such individual benefits
contributing to the overall good of society.
○ Virtuous individuals need only consider the welfare of those directly involved in their actions,
ensuring they don't violate anyone else's rights or legitimate expectations.
● Multiplication of Happiness as Virtue
○ Utilitarian ethics prioritize the multiplication of happiness as the objective of virtue.
○ Only exceptional circumstances call for considerations of public utility, while in most cases,
individuals are concerned with private utility, or the happiness of a few persons.
● Consideration of Public Interest in Abstinences
○ When individuals abstain from actions for moral reasons, they should be aware that such actions, if
practiced generally, would be harmful to society.
○ This recognition implies a reasonable regard for the public interest, a requirement common to all
systems of morals.

#10 Investigating Ultimate Sanction

● Questioning the Sanction of Moral Standards
○ In moral philosophy, it's crucial to address the question of a moral standard's sanction—its motives
for obedience and the source of its obligation.
○ This question arises whenever individuals are asked to adopt a standard or base morality on a
principle different from customary morality.
● Challenge to Utilitarian Morality
○ The question of sanction is often directed towards utilitarian morality, although it applies to all
moral standards.
○ Customary morality, ingrained through education and social opinion, feels inherently obligatory,
while principles like promoting general happiness may seem paradoxical as foundations.
● Doubts about Obligation to Promote General Happiness
○ Individuals may question why they are bound to promote the general happiness if their own
happiness lies elsewhere.
○ The preference for familiar moral principles over unfamiliar ones creates skepticism about the
binding force of promoting general happiness as a moral obligation.

#11 Internal Sanction Provides the Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility
● Sanctions of Moral Standards
○ The principle of utility can have all the sanctions of any other moral system, either external or
internal.
● External Sanctions
○ External sanctions include hope of favor or fear of displeasure from fellow creatures or from a higher
power, along with feelings of sympathy, affection, love, and awe, all of which can enforce utilitarian
morality.
○ The force of external rewards and punishments, whether physical or moral, can be utilized to
enforce utilitarian morality as it becomes recognized and accepted.
● Internal Sanction of Duty
○ The internal sanction of duty is a feeling in one's own mind, a pain attendant on violation of duty,
which in moral natures rises into a shrinking from such violation.
○ This feeling, disinterested and connecting with the pure idea of duty, is the essence of Conscience,
though encrusted with various associations derived from sympathy, love, fear, religious feeling, past
experiences, self-esteem, and social esteem.
● Complexity of Conscience
○ Conscience is a complex phenomenon, often encrusted with various associations and emotions, but
its essence lies in the feeling of duty.
○ Its binding force resides in the mass of feeling that must be overcome to violate one's standard of
right, leading to remorse if violated.
● Ultimate Sanction of Morality
 ○ The ultimate sanction of morality, apart from external motives, is a subjective feeling in one's own
mind.
○ For utilitarianism, the sanction is the same as for all other moral standards—the conscientious
feelings of mankind.
● Cultivation of Conscientious Feelings
○ While the conscientious feelings may not have binding efficacy on those who lack them, they can be
cultivated to great intensity, as proven by experience, regardless of the specific moral standard.

#12 Powerful Force and a

Sound Basis for Utilitarian Morality
● Origin of the Feeling of Duty
○ Whether the feeling of duty is innate or acquired is not necessary to decide for the present purpose.
○ If assumed to be innate, it could naturally attach itself to regard for the pleasures and pains of
others, aligning with utilitarian principles.
● Intuitive Moral Obligations
○ Intuitive moralists already believe in the obligation to consider the interests of others, which aligns
with utilitarianism.
○ The belief in the transcendental origin of moral obligation may give additional efficacy to the
internal sanction, benefiting the utilitarian principle.
● Acquired Nature of Moral Feelings
○ Moral feelings are not innate but acquired, yet they are natural to humans.
○ Like other acquired capacities, the moral faculty is a natural outgrowth from human nature, capable
of spontaneous development and high degree of cultivation.
● Influence of External Factors
○ Moral associations, even if artificially created, can become deeply ingrained through education and
early impressions.
○ The principle of utility, even if initially arbitrary, can gain potency through the same means, as
shown by experience.
● Basis of Utilitarian Morality
○ Utilitarian morality finds a firm foundation in the powerful natural sentiment of social feelings
among mankind.
○ The desire to be in unity with fellow creatures serves as a natural basis for utilitarian principles,
strengthening them when recognized as the ethical standard.

#13 Exposition of the

Greatest Happiness Principle
● Social Nature of Individuals
○ Every individual has a deeply rooted conception of themselves as a social being, desiring harmony
between their feelings and aims and those of others.
● Desire for Harmony
○ Despite differences in opinion and mental culture, individuals desire to align their aims with the
well-being of others, even if they cannot fully share their feelings.
○ The need to promote the good of others, even if it conflicts with selfish feelings, is a natural want for
many individuals.
● Ultimate Sanction of Morality
○ The conviction that promoting the happiness of others is essential serves as the ultimate sanction of
the greatest happiness morality.
○ This conviction encourages individuals to work with external motives to care for others and serves as
a powerful internal binding force, especially for those with well-developed feelings and
thoughtfulness.

Stanford Encyclopedia
● Mill’s Practical Philosophy
 ○ He thinks that there is one fundamental principle of practical reason
○ Principle of utility

The Foundations of Practical Reason:

The ‘Proof ’
● Center of Mill’s Practical Philosophy:
○ Happiness is the sole end of human action, and the promotion of it the test by which to judge of all
human conduct
● Three subclaims
○ desirability: that happiness is desirable as an end
○ exhaustiveness: that nothing but happiness is desirable as an end
○ impartiality: that each person’s happiness is equally desirable
● “Each person, so far as he believes it to be attainable, desires his own happiness” → happiness is shown to be
desirable as an end
○ Argument: ‘Desired’ does not bear the same relation to ‘desirable’ as ‘heard’ does to
‘audible’ — for desirability is the property of being deserving or worthy of being desired, whereas
audibility is property of being capable of being heard
● Argument for the desirability of happiness is naturalistic in orientation
○ Mill’s naturalism leads him to the claim that we cannot have any knowledge by intuition
● Mill’s strategy for establishing that happiness is the only desirable thing is to show that although there are
other things which are desired by human beings, such things are desired only because of the relation they bear
to happiness.
● Many things, of course, are desired merely as means to happiness. Upon inspection, such things do not strike
us as ultimately desirable, but merely as useful mechanisms for bringing about that which is ultimately
desirable.
● Mill’s argument for impartiality → many have found it problematic
○ The supposition that “equal amounts of happiness are equally desirable, whether felt by the same or
by different persons” is in fact contentious. One might well argue, for instance, that to add to
the happiness of the already content or the undeserving is not to add to the general good at
the same level as adding to the happiness of the discontent or deserving: that the value of
happiness is in part determined by where it occurs. Mill does not, however, consider these
objections.
○ Pandemic → free stuff for the poor, and not so much for those living comfortably
■ Mommy: “Kailangan din naman natin ‘yun. Hindi purket mahirap sila…”
○ Mill contends that every person's happiness is equally valuable, meaning that one person's happiness
is not inherently more important than another's.
○ Mill's argument provides rational grounds for the principle of utility, asserting that pleasure and
pain are the ultimate factors in determining what is good or evil.

Mill’s Conception of Happiness

● Pleasures of the intellect, of the feelings and imagination, and of the moral sentiments are amongst the higher
pleasures
○ But Mill’s doctrine need not be read as restrictively intellectualist. As well as pleasures of the mind,
he holds that pleasures gained in activity are of a higher quality than those gained passively.
● Lurking suspicion → in distinguishing qualities of pleasure, Mill departs from hedonism
○ However, Mill only provides a nuanced perspective on pleasure, which deviates from strict
hedonism
○ The argument presented suggests that if Mill believes that certain pleasures of lower intensity can be
more valuable than those of higher intensity, it implies that he values something beyond mere
pleasure itself. Traditional hedonism would dictate that more pleasure is always better than less
pleasure, regardless of other factors.
○ If Mill considers higher-quality pleasures to be more valuable not solely because they are more
pleasurable, but because of some other characteristic, then his theory is not strictly hedonistic.