Question

Bentham and Mill seem to disagree about the existence of differences in quality among pleasures. In other words, Bentham thinks all pleasures are equal when evaluating which to pursue, while Mill argues that there exist higher and lower quality pleasures. Taking into consideration that both these philosophers are utilitarians who prescribe to the greatest happiness principle, briefly explain why it is compelling to argue that all pleasures are equal. Also, explain why it might be problematic to assert that all pleasures are equal. With which of these two thinkers do you agree? Explain why.

it is Philosophy question that needs 300 words to respond.

Answer 1

Jeremy Bentham is the father of utilitarianism, according to his theory the action is morally right if the consequences are good and the action is wrong if they produce unhappiness or pain.

That means the rightness and wrongness of an act are based on its consequences. As per human behavior, happiness is the achievement of pleasure and avoidance of pain. According to him the hedonistic action of any human action can be calculated by calculating the intensity of pleasure and how long did it last and how fast did it follow the action and produced collateral benefits and avoided harm and pain. This would allow in calculating the net value of each action that affects an individual.

This would help in calculating the happiness of the community and the society as a whole because the collection of each individual makes a society. This helps in defining more happiness to more number of people. This also helps in welfare schemes and the judiciary system.

Millis was an English philosopher and economist his theory is also based on the utilitarian theory where he says that happiness is pleasure and absence of pain. According to him, the pleasure can change in quality and quantity, a person who gets pleasure in reaching the highest level of his achievement would have a different type of pleasure than the one who gets pleasure when at the lower level. It depends upon how much effort they put in to achieve their goal. He says happiness is the sole basis of morality, and the desires are means to happiness.
Unlike Bentham's theory that judicial is important to produce greater happiness, he says sentiment of justice is based on utility because it is necessary for human happiness.

The contradiction with Bentham’s theory and Mills' theory was that Mills was of the opinion that utilitarian theory is unemotional and failed to understand the higher pleasure and the struggle in achieving it.

Mills took the theory of Bentham as the moral theory but according to him still, people are not clear as which act is morally right and which is wrong because it has got very little validity, one act that may look good for one may not be right for the other, the statement of moral action is always having contradictory views thus the rules of action would lie on what ends are being pursued.

The theory of Bentham looks at the consequences, and the consequences appear at the end of an action. For example, killing a person is wrong, the act itself is wrong, the reason for killing would be known once the action is taken whether it was in self-defense or revenge. Punishing an innocent to calm down the violence would be a wrong act but utilitarianism would justify killing and punishing an innocent because it would bring happiness to a large number of people.

Mills' theory looks at different levels of pleasure and the struggle attached to it. It looks at the utility and what ends are being persuaded.

Both the theories are complicated and cannot be fully utilized as it may bring happiness to one and pain to others. It is often observed in the judiciary system as well that people are wrongly incarcerated in the name of bringing happiness to many people.