When Mill talks about maximizing "Happiness" he isn't talking about maximizing just any kind

of happiness or pleasure. Write a minimum of 250 words explaining--as clearly and specifically
as possible--what kind of Happiness is Mill talking about. What is the nature of this Happiness?
Use quotes from the text to back up your answer to this question. 

-‘happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation
of pleasure.’
-pigs need nothing more than to eat, sleep, and mate, but humans need more than that
-Few human creatures would consent to be changed into any of the lower animals, for a
promise of the fullest allowance of a beast's pleasures; no intelligent human being would consent
to be a fool, no instructed person would be an ignoramus, no person of feeling and conscience
would be selfish and base, even though they should be persuaded that the fool, the dunce, or the
rascal is better satisfied with his lot than they are with theirs.’
-this specific happiness is subject to understanding of the world:
-if someone is ignorant and poor, they are happy
-if someone is ignorant and rich, they are also happy
-if someone is not ignorant and knows that they can either have less in life, they
are not happy, but will choose to be unhappy with what they have than be happy with
less
-‘of two pleasures, if there be one to which all or almost all who have experienced both
give a decided preference, irrespective of any feeling of moral obligation to prefer it, that is the
more desirable pleasure’
-“epicurean” or fancy people are always going to have a baseline of needs that they can not
sacrifice in order to be happy
-

By introducing the Great Happiness Principle, Mill sets himself up to explain what the
specific happiness or pleasure is in the context of utilitarianism. The happiness he describes is
subjective to the people who pursue it, and their understanding of the world. By Mill’s definition,
‘happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation
of pleasure.’ The ultimate goal of utilitarianism is to work to make this pleasure and happiness
available in as large of a quantity as possible, but not at the cost of quality.
When happiness is the absence of pain, a ‘swine’ or pig needs nothing more than to eat,
sleep, and mate. A pig on a farm is perfectly happy when these basic needs are met, but humans
need more than this to be happy, and ‘few human creatures would consent to be changed into any
of the lower animals, for a promise of the fullest allowance of a beast's pleasures.’
This brand of happiness is based on one’s understanding of the world, as someone who is
poor can be just has happy as someone rich, as long as they are ignorant and oblivious to the fact
that they can have more or less. However, if someone is not ignorant and knows that they can
have less in life, they can never be completely satisfied but will still choose to keep what they
have to stay ‘happy’. Perfectly put, in utilitarianism ‘some kinds of pleasure are more desirable
and more valuable than others.’
Therefore, Mill breaks his definition of pleasure into two separate kinds, the higher and
the lower. When someone is aware of the two kinds, they would rather choose to keep the higher
of the two pleasures in life. In Mill’s own words, ‘A being of higher faculties requires more to
make him happy, is capable probably of more acute suffering, and is certainly accessible to it at
more points, than one at 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. We may give what explanation we
please of this’
The nature of this happiness is contingent on the acknowledgement of the two types of
pleasures. In Mill’s definition of utilitarianism, some will have to sacrifice such pleasures for the
needs of the many.