Question

John Stuart Mill: Ethics

picture of MillThe ethical theory of John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) is most extensively articulated in his classical text Utilitarianism (1861). Its goal is to justify the utilitarian principle as the foundation of morals. This principle says actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote overall human happiness. So, Mill focuses on consequences of actions and not on rights nor ethical sentiments.

This article primarily examines the central ideas of his text Utilitarianism, but the article’s last two sections are devoted to Mill’s views on the freedom of the will and the justification of punishment, which are found in System of Logic (1843) and Examination of Sir William Hamilton’s Philosophy (1865), respectively.

Educated by his father James Mill who was a close friend to Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill came in contact with utilitarian thought at a very early stage of his life. In his Autobiography he claims to have introduced the word "utilitarian" into the English language when he was sixteen. Mill remained a utilitarian throughout his life. Beginning in the 1830s he became increasingly critical of what he calls Bentham’s "theory of human nature". The two articles "Remarks on Bentham’s Philosophy" (1833) and "Bentham" (1838) are his first important contributions to the development of utilitarian thought. Mill rejects Bentham’s view that humans are unrelentingly driven by narrow self-interest. He believed that a "desire of perfection" and sympathy for fellow human beings belong to human nature. One of the central tenets of Mill’s political outlook is that, not only the rules of society, but also people themselves are capable of improvement.

What is the downsides to Mill's maximum freedoms?

Answer 1

The main downside to Mill's maximum freedoms is the potential for the infringement of individual rights and liberties in the pursuit of overall happiness.

Step-by-step explanation:

John Stuart Mill's emphasis on maximizing individual freedoms is a cornerstone of his ethical philosophy. However, the potential downside lies in the conflict between individual liberties and the pursuit of overall happiness. While Mill argues for the greatest good for the greatest number, the application of this principle could lead to situations where the rights of certain individuals are sacrificed for the perceived greater benefit of society. For instance, if a majority decides that restricting the freedom of a minority group would enhance overall happiness, Mill's utilitarianism might justify such restrictions. This creates a tension between individual rights and the utilitarian principle, raising ethical concerns about the potential for oppression and injustice in the pursuit of the greatest happiness.

Furthermore, the challenge arises in defining and measuring happiness itself. The utilitarian calculus relies on a subjective evaluation of happiness, making it difficult to objectively quantify and compare the diverse preferences and experiences of individuals. This subjectivity introduces a level of uncertainty and opens the door to potential manipulation in the interpretation of what constitutes overall human happiness. The risk of a tyranny of the majority, where the preferences of the majority suppress minority interests, is inherent in Mill's approach. Thus, while Mill's emphasis on individual freedoms is commendable, the downside lies in the potential for ethical dilemmas and conflicts when balancing these freedoms with the pursuit of collective happiness.