JOHN STUART MILL

First off I just want to say that when the reading is short I feel a lot more prepared to discuss the topic. Plus, Mill’s writing style is not too difficult to understand (but some of his concepts are).

“By the principle of utility is meant that principle which approves or disproves of every action whatsoever, according to the tendency which it appears to have to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question: or, what is the same thing in other words, to promotes or to oppose that happiness” (18).
“By utility is meant that property in an object, whereby it tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness, or to prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil, or unhappiness to the party whose interest is considered” (18.)
I understood Mill to say that Utility is the good for everybody in all situations. He presented it as a truth that had no objections. When I was reading I couldn’t help but to think of Socrates in Gorgias. The way that he was presenting his argument reminded me of how Socrates would get his opponents in a state of confusion in which they would contradict themselves and then have to ultimately admit defeat.
I found this quote interesting: “To give such proof is as impossible as it is needless” (19). To me this meant that he knew he could not give proof, but he was so confident that he felt he could get away without it.
In the beginning of Chapter II: Of Principles Adverse to that of Utility, Mill acted like he had already proved his principle of utility to be correct and that all he had to do was distinguish between his theory and all others in order to make his point.
I need some help in understanding his discussion of religion and philosophy on p.24.

I don’t think that this goes with the class discussion, but I found it interesting and it made me stop and think for a second. “…that it is necessary to know first whether a thing is right in order to know from thence whether it be conformable to the will of God” (34-35). He might be able to use this as an argument when a person does not read the Bible. But, doesn’t the Bible outline “morality” and “good”? Doesn’t the Bible tell what virtues are God’s will? I found this a weak statement on Mill’s part.