Final answer:
John Stuart Mill's harm principle is compatible with promoting utility by ensuring individual freedom unless it harms others. It aligns with utilitarianism’s Greatest Happiness Principle but emphasizes quality and impartiality in assessing happiness. Rule utilitarianism builds on this by setting general happiness-promoting rules for society to follow.
Step-by-step explanation:
John Stuart Mill's adaptation of utilitarianism introduces the harm principle, which posits that individual freedom should be maximized to the extent that it does not harm others. This principle suggests that the only justification for exerting power over an individual, against their will, is to prevent harm to others. This concept is allied closely with the idea of personal autonomy and non-interference, and it establishes a clear boundary for the limits of state control and societal norms.
According to the Greatest Happiness Principle, espoused by both Jeremy Bentham as well as Mill, the measure of a decision's moral worth is its impact on the general well-being or happiness. However, unlike Bentham, Mill argues that not all pleasures or happiness are of equal quality. He distinguishes between higher (mental) pleasures and lower (physical) pleasures, suggesting that a qualitative component is vital for determining the greatest utility.
Mill contends that utilitarianism should not only consider the agent's happiness but also that of everyone affected by an action. He emphasizes the importance of impartiality in decision-making. Agents are urged to weigh their decisions from the standpoint of a 'disinterested and benevolent spectator', and thus utility is defined by the happiness spread across all, rather than concentrated on a few.
The concept of rule utilitarianism emerges as a response to the complexity of applying the Greatest Happiness Principle to each action. Instead, rule utilitarians suggest the establishment of general rules that, if followed by the majority, would lead to the greatest happiness.
In light of the harm principle, it can be argued that Mill viewed this principle as a crucial utility-promoting rule because it is geared towards maximizing individual freedom and personal well-being while also safeguarding others from harm. The harm principle seeks to encapsulate a basic right to liberty while ensuring that society's actions align with the overarching goal of collective happiness. Thus, Mill's vision could be seen as advocating the harm principle as not only compatible with utility but as its fundamental enhancer within a social context.