John Stuart Mill was the son of a philosopher who worked with Jeremy Bentham. However, Mill thought that Bentham's idea of pleasure was vague and thought that different forms of pleasure had different values

John Stuart Mill was the son of a philosopher who worked with Jeremy Bentham. However, Mill thought that Bentham's idea of pleasure was vague and thought that different forms of pleasure had different values. Certain areas of Bentham's theory proved to be problematic when trying to apply it to real life situations. The common example of this is supposing you were a doctor driving to give a patient an emergency Caesarian section, but you see an old man and the woman's husband in a car crash together. With all four lives in a fatal state, following the theory is impossible as people would respond differently as well as not having the time to consider all the options.

Mill recognised that it was within human nature for a person not to try for the maximum pleasure, but for a closer pleasure instead, and developed Bentham's theory. Bentham's theory states that an action that will produce the most happiness is the justified decision, using the hedonic calculus, and does not allow for the action to be morally inexcusable.

The example of this would be the sadistic guards who enjoy torturing a prisoner, which would be producing happiness for multiple guards and just the pain of the one prisoner. Following this, Mill believed in higher pleasures and lower pleasures, and that the higher pleasures were more fulfilling than the lower. He thought that the lower pleasures were ones of the body, such as food and sleep, and that the higher pleasures were those of the mind, for example reading poetry.

Mill stated that 'It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied, better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied'. By this he meant that it is better to be unhappy and to have the potential to strive for the higher pleasures as opposed to not having this opportunity and being content with having the lower pleasures. Mill however did not take into account that not everybody would share the same ideas of higher and lower pleasures as he.

By using some problems of implementing Bentham's Act utilitarianism, Mill developed his theory, Rule utilitarianism. Unlike Act utilitarianism, Rule moves from general principles to specific actions. Following Rule utilitarianism, general laws and principles should be put first so that it is then known which specific actions are not permitted, such as the example with the guards. Similar to this is the consideration that rule takes priority. For example the law society needs you to tell the truth, means that by telling the truth it will secure the greatest good for the greatest number. By doing this it determines what is morally good by consequences of following a general rule. An example would be to say it is morally right to obey the rules to bring benefit to society and therefore the maximum happiness. There is also strong and weak rule utilitarianism. Strong utilitarianism is where the rules should never be broken, whereas weak is where the rules can sometimes be broken and is more flexible although the rule will still need to be taken into account. The strongest difference between rule and act utilitarianism is that act is a quantitative judgement whereas rule is a qualitative judgement.

(b)

Utilitarianism may be regarded as a strong ethical theory as there are many strengths to it. It is a practical theory because it is easy to use by everyone so a knowledge of the subject matter is not needed. It is easy and simple to understand so that everybody can use it. The theory means that individuals cannot misuse power for their own gain, at the expense of the majority as it is for the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Utilitarian theories support the general view that human wellbeing is important so decisions are being made within people's best interests. The theory promotes democracy in that the interests of the majority are considered, and dangerous minorities are not allowed to dominate. With the interest of the majority being considered this is also following the greatest pleasure for the greatest amount of people.

On the other hand are the weaknesses of the theory. With the theory relying upon the calculations of the possible consequences the future cannot be predicted. When determining what to do in a given situation, the circumstances as well as the consequences can change. Also the majority is not always right, so both viewpoints should be considered. As well as this no allowance is made for personal relationships such as the situation of who to save in a fire- your own child or the scientist with a cure for cancer. The scientist would be able to save the lives of many people so by using the theory you should choose the scientist but with your child being of such great importance to you, as well as your family, it would be a very hard decision to make. As well as this human rights are not taken into consideration at all so following the theory torture would be acceptable if it meant the most pleasure and the least pain.

Utilitarianism may be regarded as a strong ethical theory as it helps to teach the difference between right and wrong. Through using the majority of people's happiness as the main factor for a just action, it expresses that decisions made are not just in self best interests. However there are many problems with the theory in that it cannot be applied to real life circumstances, where there may not be the time to come up with a justified argument for or against an action. As well as this not all people will gauge a situation the same, allowing for conflicting opinions of other's wellbeing. The theory can be used effectively as it can encourage people to assess their own actions before making a decision.

Jemma Millman- Utilitarianism