Utilitarianism

Nonfiction | Essay / Speech | Adult | Published in 1861

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Chapters 1-2

Chapters 3-4

Chapter 5

Key Figures

Themes

Index of Terms

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Tools

Beta

Discussion Questions

Chapters 3-4Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Chapter 3 Summary: “Of the Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility”

In the Chapter 3, Mill describes the “sanction” by which individuals are obligated to follow the principle of utility. Because moral philosophers are often called upon to provide a justification for any moral code they propose, Mill explains the reasons for following the principle of utility, describing it as a “moral standard.” Individuals who follow the specific moral laws they learned as a child are often immediately skeptical when a philosopher attempts to propose a general principle that underlies moral actions. For this reason, Mill feels he must provide a description of the sanction, or, the “binding force,” by which individuals are expected to follow utilitarianism.

For Mill, the sanction for any moral code can be divided into two groups: external and internal. External sanctions refer to the sense of obligation one feels towards a moral code in order to appease the members of one’s community or God. Internal sanctions refer to an individual’s conscience, which Mill defines as “a [painful] feeling in our own mind” (141) that arises whenever an individual acts immorally. While some individuals do not have a conscience, Mill argues that the vast majority of individuals obey a moral code due to this “subjective feeling in our own minds” (142). Mill believes that these internal sanctions refer to every form of moral code proposed by philosophers, including his own theory of utilitarianism.

Though utilitarianism shares commonalities with other philosophies, Mill argues that the theory of utilitarianism differs from other moral codes due to the fact that it has a “basis of powerful natural sentiment” (144). This feeling is inherently a part of human nature because it manifests as “the desire to be in unity with our fellow creatures” (144). Mill believes that the existence of society depends on the relationships that exist between the members of a community and the expectation that all community members seek to improve society for all individuals. As most individuals cooperate with others to achieve their desires, they are led “to identify [their] feelings more and more with [others’] good” (145). Mill believes that this “feeling of unity” aligns with utilitarianism’s emphasis on the moral necessity of actions that improve the happiness of society as a whole. Mill notes that while such a feeling of unity may not exist in every individual of a society, he believes that it could be taught, similar to how the moral code of religion is currently taught. This kind of social education with a focus on unity will enable utilitarianism to become the predominant moral code.

Chapter 4 Summary: “Of What Sort of Proof the Principle of Utility is Susceptible”

In Chapter 4, Mill argues that the principle of utility is the basis of morality. For Mill, investigations of morality are “questions of ultimate ends” (148); these explorations attempt to describe the ends or desired outcomes of human actions. Mill’s philosophy of utilitarianism asserts that the ultimate end of all human action is the achievement of happiness, whether for oneself or for society.

Mill also argues that the “ultimate ends” of actions are the things are “desirable” for individuals, stating “that happiness is desirable, and the only thing desirable, as an end; all other things being only desirable as means to that end” (148). Mill writes that such a statement is impossible to prove; it is simply an argument that claims that happiness is “desirable.” For Mill, the only way to prove that something is desirable is if “people do actually desire it” (148) in real life. Because people desire happiness, Mill argues that this desire is proof that happiness can be considered as “one of the ends of [human] conduct, and consequently one of the criteria of morality” (148). Further, since individual happiness is “a good” to each individual person, then the general happiness of a society must be “a good to the aggregate of all persons” (148).

Throughout the rest of the chapter, Mill aims to show that happiness is the “sole criterion” that dictates moral choices. Mill discusses other possible goals for behavior like virtue, as critics of utilitarianism often argue that individuals act out of desire for virtue, rather than happiness. Mill argues that virtuous behavior is virtuous when its goal is to improve the general happiness of society. However, Mill also acknowledges that there are individuals for whom virtue “is desirable in itself” (149) and whose behavior is based upon a desire for virtue rather than for happiness or pleasure. Mill argues that, for such people, virtue is simply a “part of their happiness” (150) and that the utilitarian doctrine still applies. Mill provides other examples in which “the means [for achieving happiness] become a part of the end” (150). For instance, many individuals make money in order to have more money, rather than using money as a means to purchase desired objects that will bring them pleasure. In these instances, money becomes a “part of [those individuals’] happiness” (150).

Another critique that Mill addresses is the argument that individuals will often use their will to undertake actions that are not pleasurable or desirable to them. While Mill acknowledges that there are cases where an individual must will him or herself to perform a certain action (such as a virtuous one), he argues that one’s will is still based upon one’s desires. Mill argues that individuals only willfully undergo actions they do not desire out of habit; the habit began because, at one point, the action was seen as desirable. Because “will is the child of desire” (153), happiness still serves as the ultimate end for individuals who behave habitually.

Chapters 3-4 Analysis

In these chapters of “Utilitarianism,” Mill switches the focus of his essay from defining the ideas of utilitarianism to explaining why the principle of utility is the basis for morality, as opposed to any other proposed moral code or system. In Mill’s argument, utilitarianism is grounded in humankind’s inherent nature, which provides the philosophy with a strength and credibility that other moral codes lack.

Chapter 3 focuses on the obligation individuals have to follow utilitarianism; Mill calls this obligation “sanctions.” There are two forms of sanctions: external and internal sanctions. External sanctions refers to anything pressuring us to behave in a certain way–for instance, the desire to earn praise from our neighbors, or to appease God. In contrast, internal sanctions have to do with the idea of one’s own conscience and the discomfort which arises whenever an individual considers breaking the moral code. Mill argues that the same sanctions that apply in utilitarianism apply for any moral code, and that both can exist to obligate people to follow a utilitarian standard. However, Mill argues that while most moral codes are “artificial creation[s]” and ultimately “arbitrary,” utilitarianism is different due to the fact that it is grounded upon a “natural basis of sentiment” (144) that already exists within human nature. As human civilization encourages humans to embrace cooperation and concern for their fellow human beings, they are naturally inclined to behave according to the principle of utility.

In Chapter 4, Mill sets out to prove that happiness is not a superficial concern; rather, it is the “ultimate end” of all human actions. The idea that “happiness is desirable, and the only thing desirable, as an end” lies at the heart of utilitarianism (148). As happiness is the ultimate end which all humans desire, then all actions are morally right insofar as they increase happiness. In the rest of the chapter, Mill focuses on proving that happiness is the sole thing that individuals desire, making it in turn the sole criterion for morality. For Mill, “happiness is not an abstract idea, but a concrete whole” (150-151) composed of numerous “parts.” While some individuals may desire things other than happiness, such as virtue, money, power, or fame, Mill argues that these things contribute to happiness for that individual. As such, happiness is always the ultimate goal of human conduct, even when someone appears to be working to attain something else.