Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 62 views

    Activity 2

    Uploaded by

    Angilyn Lagatic
    This document discusses John Stuart Mill's concept of utilitarianism and the idea of "higher" and "lower" pleasures. It questions whether all pleasures can be measured on a single scale or compared. It also disagrees with Mill's view that the majority preference determines higher pleasures, arguing that the majority can be misguided. The document concludes that happiness is not just about pleasure but also about motivation and that torture is never justified, even for suspected criminals who have not been proven guilty.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Activity 2

    Uploaded by

    Angilyn Lagatic
    62 views2 pages
    This document discusses John Stuart Mill's concept of utilitarianism and the idea of "higher" and "lower" pleasures. It questions whether all pleasures can be measured on a single scale or compared. It also disagrees with Mill's view that the majority preference determines higher pleasures, arguing that the majority can be misguided. The document concludes that happiness is not just about pleasure but also about motivation and that torture is never justified, even for suspected criminals who have not been proven guilty.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses John Stuart Mill's concept of utilitarianism and the idea of "higher" and "lower" pleasures. It questions whether all pleasures can be measured on a single scale or compared. It also disagrees with Mill's view that the majority preference determines higher pleasures, arguing that the majority can be misguided. The document concludes that happiness is not just about pleasure but also about motivation and that torture is never justified, even for suspected criminals who have not been proven guilty.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    62 views2 pages

    Activity 2

    Uploaded by

    Angilyn Lagatic
    This document discusses John Stuart Mill's concept of utilitarianism and the idea of "higher" and "lower" pleasures. It questions whether all pleasures can be measured on a single scale or compared. It also disagrees with Mill's view that the majority preference determines higher pleasures, arguing that the majority can be misguided. The document concludes that happiness is not just about pleasure but also about motivation and that torture is never justified, even for suspected criminals who have not been proven guilty.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Activity 2 – Utilitarianism

    1. Are all pleasure commensurable? Can they be evaluated on a single scale? Can some
    goods, like friendships, be balanced against other goods, like money?
     No, because our personal pleasures were discovered in quite different ways, and
    different kinds of pleasures cannot be compared. But I think it's out of proportion when
    it comes to wealth and friendship. Yes, when we have all we desire, money can offer us
    with pleasures, and if we work hard enough, we can easily gain fortune. However, more
    than money, I prized and treasured the pleasures I received from my friend. Yes, when
    we have all we desire, money may provide us pleasures, and if we work hard, we can
    easily obtain money, but true friendship is hard to find.

    2. Mill revises utilitarianism by arguing for “higher” pleasures. Which pleasures are higher?
     The pleasure that are more desirable than the ones that are less valuable. The pleasure
    of discovering new things and assisting others, for example are more desirable than the
    pleasures of eating and drinking. A higher level of pleasure is often described as people
    choosing it over another pleasure, even if is associated with pain, and not trading it for a
    greater amount of the other pleasure.

    3. Mill proposes that “higher” pleasures are those preferred by the majority of people. Do
    you agree that this is a good way of distinguishing between higher and lower pleasures?
    Can a well-informed majority prefer higher pleasures?
     Because some members of the majority are irresponsible and mistaken, I disagree. What
    if the majority of individuals chose using drugs for their enjoyment? or even sex if you
    also smoke and drink? We are well aware that minorities are not permitted to use these
    things or carry out these actions. We are unable to conclusively state if the vast majority
    of people can distinguish between greater and lower enjoyment levels. For me,
    pleasures are for everyone, regardless of whether they belong to the majority or not.
    We can, however, distinguish between them on our own. There is a lot of hardship and
    giving up in life.
    4. Do you agree that happiness is the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain, and that
    all actions are directed toward pleasure?
     In my opinion, pressure is not pursued in an effort to avoid suffering since it would be
    escapism, which would eventually result in a vicious cycle of quick happiness and
    sorrow. We all want things that make us feel good, but the motivation behind our
    desires is what counts.

    5. Is it justifiable to build a basketball court because there are basketball fans, than to build
    hospitals because there are fewer sick people?
     No, it is never acceptable to construct a basketball court just because there are
    basketball fans but no hospitals for the sick. If there is a budget, put those aims first.
    Basketball courts can wait if there is money left over from the budget. Look after your
    fellow humans, treat them, and let them recuperate. Always prioritize your health. The
    moment is right to create a basketball court for basketball fanatics if there are enough
    hospitals to house sick people.

    6. When is it justifiable to torture suspected criminals?


     Never should a suspect in a crime be tortured. They are the alleged or suspected
    culprits, as you stated. Do you recall that you must first be proven guilty in order to be
    found guilty? Given that they are also people, criminals are entitled to protection under
    the law. Despite losing their civil and political rights, they are nonetheless covered by
    basic human rights as long as they remain on this earth.

    You might also like