The Ethical Dilemma of Maximizing Pleasure. Utilitarianism Dilemma Essay

The Ethical Dilemma of Maximizing Pleasure. Utilitarianism Dilemma - Essay Example My predicament provides quite a simplified and inaccurate version of John Stuart Mill’s principle of utility which states that actions promoting happiness or pleasure are considered to be correct whereas actions promoting unhappiness or pain are considered to be wrong (John Stuart Mill 330). According to Mill’s principle, my choice of going to Nuit Blanche instead of studying was the right one as I was able to maximize my pleasure. But, this situation is too simplistic and does not provide a moral argument for Mill’s principle. Let us consider the following thought experiment where a trolley is out of control and it is approaching five people who cannot escape the impact. Fortunately, you are next to a switch which could change the path of the train and save the five people. But, the other track is under construction and if you were to flip the switch, you would kill one construction worker. In this situation, Mill’s principle of utility would argue that s aving five people would result in maximizing the most happiness or pleasure and therefore it would be morally justified to kill the construction worker. Thus, the central idea of Mill’s principle states that the morality of an action is contingent upon its consequence. I believe that Mill’s principle is problematic because the notion of happiness or pleasure is subjective to every human being and this subjectivity creates problems when solving ethical dilemmas. In order to present my position clearly, I will first provide the benefits of Mill’s principle. I will then elaborate on some of the common objections and problems that his principle faces and demonstrate my issue with the principle and how its application fails in contemporary society. Mill’s Principle: Mill contributed to utilitarianism through reinforcing the view that individuals ought to take actions that produce the greatest happiness among people while keeping within reason. In contrast to o ther contributors to utilitarianism, Mill was of the view that the concept of happiness had differences qualitatively i.e. being directly proportional to intelligence of the individual. He argues that happiness is superior to contentment and one who experiences higher forms of happiness would not trade them for lower forms, â€Å"Few intelligent creatures would consent to be changed into any of the lower animals for a promise of the fullest allowance of the beast’s pleasures, no intelligence would consent to be a fool† (John Stuart Mill 21). He further argues that those who have experienced only the lower happiness are not in a position to objectively contribute to the question of which one is better (23). The gist of Mill’s principle is consequentialism; that actions are right based on the degree to which the greatest good for the greatest number of people is promoted. Benefits of Mill’s Principle: Mill’s argument of utilitarianism gives a yardsti ck to judge actions as either being right or wrong on the basis of the amount of happiness caused and to how many individuals. It thus can be applied in guiding actions that potentially raise ethical questions, where it can be argued that acting for the benefit of happiness for the majority of people is the right course of action; individuals should always choose to that which produces the greatest utility. While traditional consequentialism would seem to excuse any form of action as long as it produces pleasure, Mill’s principle is based on qualitative reasoning, establishing that there are higher and lower forms of happiness, hence sadist actions such as torture cannot be excused on however much happiness they cause to majority of people. Shortfalls and Objections