Mill's Utilitarian Ethics - Term Paper Example

Assignment 2 Ethics is a branch of philosophy that mainly involves defending, systematizing and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct, ethics address disputes of moral diversity, the best way for humans to live and the king of actions that are said to right or wrong in given circumstances. In a summary ethics seeks to resolve the question that deals with human morality concepts such as virtue and vice, justice and crime right and wrong and lastly good and evil. Ethics is divided into three categories that are; the applied ethics, normative ethics and Meta ethics (Singer, 2000, pp 61-86). Great philosophers and many theorists have tried to explain ethics in different ways, according to John Stuart Mull, who was an English philosopher, economist and also a civil servant. Mill was considered the most influential English-speaking philosopher during the nineteenth century; he had an outspoken concept of liberty that justified freedom of the individual in opposition to unlimited state control. Most of his works were mainly history and philosophy that to a greatly dealt with liberty. According to mill’s ethical hedonic utilitarianism, his theory is regarded as a form of consequentialism that suggest that for an action to be regarded as permissible it has to be determined by examining its results and outcomes as compared to those other outcomes. With what would have happened if an alternative action were taken. On a general opinion, everyone is his/her best judge, when one perceive to take action that according to his or her evaluation it is the last best course of action, then he or she should be given freedom to carry on with their plan (Henry,2004, pp 22). Mill addresses the limits and nature of power that are exercised by society over the individual, according to mill, it is acceptable for one to harm themselves as long as the person is only inflicting pain on themselves and not harming others. However, he notes that individuals should be prevented from doing lasting and serious harm to themselves or they are even their property since not one exists in isolation. Serious harm done to someone or their property also affects others and the community at large, additionally, mill exclude those who are considered to be incapable of self government and making effective decisions on their lives such as children people of the insane mind and those living in the backward state of society. Mill insisted that the harm include acts of omission and commission, the example of omission can be given an example of failing to appear as a witness in court, failing to pay taxes mill suggested that this act be regulated. On the contrary, he noted that what can be taken as harming somebody is when force or fraud is not used and the affected individual gives consent to assume the risk. This can be explained that a person may offer unsafe employment to others provided they have been explained the conditions waiting and have chosen to continue having that job. However, mill places the limit that the community should not allow its members to sell themselves to be used into slavery (Henry, 2004, pp 22). Mill argues that individuals ought to be free to do as they wish unless they pose a threat to others or harm them. He notes that people are rational creatures with quite good ability to make decisions about their well being where the government should only interfere in its aim to give more protection to the society. Additionally he said that the despotism is a known legitimate mode which the government uses in dealing with barbarians, also a way to provide the end to their improvement which is a means that justifies the end (Linda, 2002 pp 65). Connectively, mill argues that a free speech should be a necessary condition social and intellectual progress and accessing personal liberty. A silenced opinion does not contain elements of truth, as opposed to many his advocate for airing of opinions even if they are false claiming that they have productive reason where the individual is likely to leave erroneous beliefs shortly after they are involved in an open exchange of ideas that enlighten them to this critically. Secondly, making other to re-examine and re-affirm their beliefs when they are involved in the debate. Mill suggests that their beliefs be kept from declining and turning to be mere dogma. Mill concludes that unmeasured vituperation that may be employed on the side of another prevailing opinion does not make people deflect from expressing opposition opinions and also paying attention to those expressing them (Mill, 2004 pp 11). On the issue of a struggle between authority and liberty, according to mill liberty is a contest between subjects and the government. He defined social liberty as protection from tyranny of political rulers, he advocated putting some limits on the rulers power to enable people to make use of their own decisions. Alternatively people should have a democratic right to have a say in the government decisions. Mill noted that only social liberty consisted the limits and natural power that can be exercised by the society over individuals. For this to be successful, one should first obtain recognition of certain immunities that are regarded as rights or political liberties and secondly to have a system with constitutional checks. On the other hand, mill’s view the ability to limit government’s power was not enough, he noted that a society can have its own mandate, nevertheless if it gives wrong mandates instead of right ones or by any chance at all gives a mandate which ought not to meddle then it is said to practice a social tyranny more formidable than another king of political oppression leaving very few people to escape which leads to enslaving the soul itself (Murray, 2006 pp, 105). Mill considered women as very useful members of society where he began to write of greater rights for women, this makes mill to be considered among the earliest women ‘right advocate. With his book that was titled the subjection of women he tried to prove that the legal subjugation of women was wrong which gave way to perfect equality. Additionally he insisted on the role of women in marriage and how the best way to perfect it. He considered it to be ethical to give women more rights just like the male counterparts since they are more equally humans as men are. Women should be given a chance to pursue education, have the right to choose their own marriage partners and also be involved in societal and community development (Wonsuk, 2010, pp 68). Mill described to the move educate slaves as a sober one since it prepared them and also induced them to their new work making them useful to civilization and other progress in the technological field. Mill supported the slave trade abolition which was taken place in the United States by that time; mill proved that identifying people on their race, or skin color is a presumption which is not acceptable within society (Singer, 2000, pp 61-86). According to the Mill’s principle of utility, an action is only permissible if only its consequences of the action are good compared to other actions, connectively mill suggests that an alternative formulation action be permissible if only there is no other action available to the agent that will have better consequences this means that the agent has the freedom to consider and also take action that he considers best in the filed. Mill, however, noted that, an action can have good consequences but still be considered not permissible in the event there are other alternatives that when chosen can have far better consequences. On the hedonic utilization, mill says that happiness and unhappiness are the important consequences of an action; this is because everyone’s happiness is taken into account and also given equal consideration. In these consequences there should be no limit no matter how long it may take for the consequences to arise. Mill says that the moral goal for our actions is to create the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people where happiness should be distributed among many people as possible; in summary the best way to determine whether an action is permissible is to gauge how happy people shall be after performing the action (Lafollette, 2000, pp 23-57). Mills theory allow for injustice since actions with the best consequences sometimes can be considered to be unjust which makes some people to mistake the theory and use it for personal gain and satisfaction. It is everybody’s obligation to act justly which can be rendered as defensible though, when justice leads to poor consequences that are not ethical in the society. Mill’s theory does not prohibit anything since he believes that no action can be said to be full impermissible since it might have some circumstance that would yield best consequences. Some actions are regarded as wrong since they have terrible results hence regarded as impressible (Hoy, 2005, pp 64-85). However mills theory ignores many moral and ethical factors which are part of forming consequentialism, this is because it only considers what happens after the action has already been taken and cannot be reverted to its original status. Additionally, it pays no attention to anything that is forms part of the history of that action. A good and effective action should take account of the results and past experience that gives a rough estimate of what is expected to a happen (Valasquez, 2014, pp 2-7). Since every human in their right mind are able to distinguish whether an action is right or wrong, the human nature which guides people through they is conscious to make ethical decision that may be individual or societal. It is the code of ethics that differentiates humans with animals where it is common for a person to be regarded to act as an animal if he goes against the unwritten code of ethics. Nevertheless people should feel free to act as per their choice and right decision Reference Henry R. W.(2004). An Introduction to Mills Utilitarian Ethics. Cambridge University Press. Hoy, D. 2005, Critical resistance from poststructuralist to post critique, Massachusetts. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Lafollette, H. 2000. The Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory. Blackwell Philosophy Guides (1 ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. Linda C. R. (2002). "Spirit of the Age". John Stuart Mill and the Religion of Humanity. University of Missouri Press. Murray N. R. 2006. An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought. Ludwig von Mises Institute. Mill, J. S. and Bentham, J. edited by Ryan, Alan. (2004). Utilitarianism and other essays. London: Penguin Books. Singer, P. (2000), Writings on an ethical life, London. Harper Collins Publishers, Valasquez. M, Andre.C and Shanks T. 2004 what is ethics available at < https://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/whatisethics.html > [accessed on 20th April 2004] Wonsuk C. Kalmanson K. 2010. Confucianism in Context: Classic Philosophy and Contemporary Issues, East Asia and Beyond. SUNY Press. Read More