John Stuart Mill- Utilitarian

Philosophers
III Semester
John Stuart Mill
• He found the “ principle of utility” the keystone of his belief.
• He wrote 8 books out of which important for the purpose are –
• 1. On Liberty (1859)
• 2. Consideration on representative Government (1861)
• 3. Utilitarianism (1865)
• 4. Subjection of Women
Utilitarianism was considered one of the least convincing of Mill’s works. It was
written as an exposition and defence of the pleasure philosophy applied to ethics,
but he makes so many changes that there is little left of the original creed. He
discovered that the direct pursuit of pleasure is futile and that happiness was to be
found only by not seeking it.
Mill on Utilitarianism-
• He sees that human nature is not entirely moved by self-interest, as
Bentham and his father have taught, but is capable of self-sacrifice. In
the concluding section of his essay on Utilitarianism, Mill declares that
there are “certain social utilities which are vastly more important, and
therefore more absolute and imperative, than any others are as a
class….and which, therefore, ought to be, as well as naturally are,
guarded by a sentiment not only different in degree but also in kind
distinguished from the milder feeling which attaches to the mere idea
of promoting human pleasure or convenience, at once by the more
definite nature of its commands, and by the sterner character of its
sanctions”.
Mill’s Essays on Utilitarianism
• In the beginning of the Essay -Mill accepts the Benthamite conception
of utility without any reservation –”the creed which accepts as the
foundation of morals, Utility or the Greatest happiness principle,
holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote
happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.
By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain by
unhappiness, pain and the privation of pleasure…pleasure and
freedom from pain, are the only thing desirable as ends; and…all
desirable things …are desirable either for the pleasure inherent in
themselves or as means to the promotion of pleasure and the
prevention of pain”.
• In spite of this acceptance of Benthamite conception of utility a little
later after few paragraphs it becomes clear that Mill was accepting a
modified form of the Benthamite theory.
• He tried to remove the misconception from the minds of some of the
thinkers of his time that utilitarian conception of happiness did not
stand for the individual agent’s happiness alone, but for all concerned
• He reiterated his faith in the utilitarian morality as he writes in his
famous book “On Liberty”. “I regard utility as the ultimate appeal on
all ethical questions but it must be utility in the largest sense,
grounded on the permanent interests of man as a progressive being”.
On Liberty
• Mill’s ideas on liberty had a direct relationship with his theory of utility or
happiness. Mill regarded liberty as a necessary means for the development
of individuality which was to become the ultimate source of happiness.
• There was only one road for him to take that was the road of higher utility.
Mill has drawn a distinction between higher and lower utility which may
better be understood respectively as conducing to the good of society and
the goods of individuals.
• He is keen to promote good of the society and as well as of the individuals.
• But the ultimate basis on which he erects his grand edifice of liberty is his
consideration of social goods, conceding of course, that individual has also
not been lost sight.
• His essay On liberty occupies a very important place in the history of
political thought. Never before a finer defence of 1) Liberty of thought and
2) liberty of discussion has ever been written.
• He believed that it is man’s mind that changes society and that only free
discussion can nourish fruitful ideas. In his essay “On Liberty” he writes, “
All mankind minus one lacks the right to coerce single coerce the single
dissentient”.
• For if it supresses his opinion, it injures the human race. The opinion
supressed may be true and “if not suppressed for ever, it may be thrown
back for centuries”.
• It may be partly true, in which case it is necessary corrective to the
accepted body of truth. It may be false, but controversy will strengthen true
conviction. A creed accepted because of authority is a “mummery stuffed
and dead”.
• There is no slumber like that of a deep-seated opinion and can be to
the advantage of mankind to disturb it. Then they will acquire “the
clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its
collision with error”.
• It will be seen that Mill is a firm believer in the survival of the fittest in
the world of idea, and that he is convinced that truth is fittest to
survive. But even if men will not accept the inherently truthful. Mill
believes that authority can not help.
• Call Caesar to save Christ and he at once destroys him. Mankind can
hardly be too often reminded that there was once a man named
Socrates between whom and the legal authorities and public opinion
of his time there took place a memorable collision.
• Mill had no doubt of the utility of absolute liberty of thought and
expression. He does not recognise any limitation of any kind
whatsoever on the right of free discussion of individuals.
• “ No society in which these liberties are not on the whole respected,
is free, whatever may be its form of government, and none is
completely free in which they do not exist absolute and unqualified”.
• This advocacy of Mill does not hold good in modern period because
no society, howsoever democratically constituted it might be, may
guarantee such as absolute and unqualified right. To every right a
corresponding duty has been attached.
• Not only Mill advocated freedom of thought and discussion but he was also
concerned with the development of individuality of men and women in the
community. He was convinced that all wise and noble things come and must come
from individuals.
• To Mill there can be no self-development without liberty.
• This liberty which he talks about is the liberty of action. This liberty of action has
been divided into two parts- 1. self regarding actions; 2. other-regarding actions.
State should not interfere with the self- regarding actions. “ In the part which
merely concerns himself, his independence is of right, absolute”.
• Mill explains that the rationale of his individualism is strictly utilitarian. He writes
that-
“ It is proper to state that I forego any advantage which could be derived to my
argument from the idea of abstract right, as a thing independent of utility. I regard
utility as the ultimate appeal on all ethical questions, but it must be utility in the
largest sense, grounded on the permanent interests of man as a progressive being”.
• But Mill justifies state intervention with those other regarding actions which
produce positive demonstrable harm to others.
• “The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any
member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to
others”.
• It is legitimate to oblige a man to bear his share in maintaining society-
conscription is not to be regarded as an unwarranted infringement of his
liberty.
• He would not admit for instance that the police power of the state should
be used to punish a person for gambling, drunkenness or sexual immorality
or to abridge his access to these evils, but he felt obliged to concede that it
might be justly used to combat the social consequence of such acts.
• It is, therefore, clear from this discussion that interference for well-being of
society can go to any extent.
• But if Mill justified restricted interference not because that he is a great
democrat, but because of his inbred distrust of authority, and specially of
democratically controlled authority.
• Mill’s contention was that individual in democracy was swamped in the
general. Democracy prevented him from developing his individuality.
• From the arguments of Mill and his definition of liberty it becomes clear that
he is a reluctant democrat and all the more a champion of empty liberty.
• Defining liberty at one place he says- “ Liberty consists in doing what one
desires”. You would be justified, Mill says “in preventing a man crossing a
bridge that you know to be unsafe”. “Liberty consists in doing what one
desires, and he does not desire to fall into the river”.
• The man desired to cross the bridge, but it is legitimate to frustrate this desire
so that the greater desire which can be imputed to him, of not falling in the
river can be achieved.
• This definition of liberty throws door open to any amount of
interference on the part of the state.
• Mill has gone far towards admitting the extreme idealist contention
that one can forced to be free.