Mill’s Utilitarianism, Research Paper Example

The peer-reviewed journal article selected for this analysis is entitled “Utilitarianism without Consequentialism: The Case of John Stuart Mill” (Jacobson 1). Many philosophers claim that John Stuart Mill’s ideas incorporate utilitarianism with consequentialism, but there is little evidence for this case. Ultimately, therefore, these principles state that ethical decisions should be made based on their potential to help the greatest number of individuals without consideration of the impacts that the consequences may have. Therefore, the intention to act, rather than the end result of the action, is deemed to be moral according to Mill.

Mill’s utilitarianism states that the goal of ethics should be to ensure that the greatest good occurs for the greatest number of people. According to Mill himself, “It is quite compatible with the principle of utility to recognise the fact, that some kinds of pleasure are more desirable and more valuable than others. It would be absurd that while, in estimating all other things, quality is considered as well as quantity, the estimation of pleasures should be supposed to depend on quantity alone.” Therefore, Mill’s principle considers the quality and quantity of pleasure, which is defined as the most pleasure for the greatest amount of people. In comparing two actions, the one should be taken that seems to have the greatest benefit.

According to the article, it is logical that Mill was able to be a utilitarian and not a consequentialist because his philosophy is primarily concerned with decision making based on needs, rather than carefully calculated thoughts based on consideration of the consequences. Ultimately, the author claims that the conventional interpretation of Mill’s work is faulty because people apply their own interpretations of Mill’s words to its meaning. However, Mill never directly states that the consequences of each option should be considered. Rather, we analyze the concept that choices should confer maximal benefit by thinking of the pleasure that occurs rather than the pleasure that is expected to occur.

While the author’s interpretation of Mill’s theory is plausible, it is important to consider that philosophical theories were meant to be interpreted. Therefore, I disagree with this argument. Mill’s discussions focused mainly on the act of decision making, but it would be irrational for us to make decisions without considering at least some of the consequences. Based on the common interpretation of utilitarianism, it is important to consider consequentialism as well. We cannot be certain of what the correct action really is without thinking about what will happen as a result. Thus, the most ethical decision should be defined as the one that has the greatest degree of impact, rather than the greatest potential for impact.

It is likely that philosophers will continue to add their own thoughts to Mill’s utilitarianism in order to gain an understanding of these theories that are applicable to the modern world. Therefore, it is important for us to consider that these philosophies do not remain static, and that we must be open to the possibility that they can be amended. Since we attempt to describe right from wrong by deciding how best to make actions, our tendency to change these theories will be based on changing social ideals. In the author’s case, it appears that he is calling for more of a need to make rational decisions. If we do so, we will not need to consider the consequences. However, it appears that this opinion is not reflective of the majority, which ironically based on utilitarianism, indicates that it is best we ignore it.

Works Cited

Jacobson D. “Utilitarianism without Consequentialism: The Case of John Stuart Mill”. 2014. Web. 18 November 2014 <http://www.pgrim.org/philosophersannual/pa28articles/jacobson.pdf>