John Stuart Mill’s “Utilitarianism” Essay Sample
Through the class of this paper the writer will seek to show. picturing both sides of the statement. the grounds in which a follower of John Stuart Mill’s “Utilitarianism” would differ with the events taking topographic point in Ursula Le Guin’s “The One’s Who Walk Away from Omelas. ”
“The credo which accepts as the foundation of ethical motives. Utility. or the Greatest Happiness Principle. holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to advance felicity. incorrect as they tend to bring forth the contrary of happiness” ( Mill 55 ) . This is how Mill foremost presents the thought of Utilitarianism. If it promotes happiness it is right. if it promotes the contrary of felicity. so it is incorrect. If one were to merely take this statement. without farther reading. and so analyze Le Guin’s “The One’s Who Walk Away from Omelas” . one would no uncertainty conclude that a follower of Mill would hold with the pick made by the people of Omelas. They chose to advance felicity for many. instead than take felicity for one. This seems to be acceptable at first glimpse. but a farther scrutiny will demo that this merely is non true.
It would be rather easy for one to read Mill’s “Utilitarianism” and make up one’s mind that Mill would hold with the people of Omelas’ determination. For case. Mill states on page 59 that “the observation of which an being such as has been described might be. to the greatest extent possible. secured to all world ; and non to them merely. but. so far as the nature of things admits. to the whole sentient creative activity. ” Mill is stating here that Utility means to seek and give felicity to all people. every bit many as possible. around the universe. He states that the ultimate terminal would be “an being exempt every bit far as possible from pain” ( 59 ) . It would be simple to presume that Mill would believe the people of Omelas’ determination to be absolutely moral. For Mill says that ethical motives are grounded in the fact that pleasance and freedom from hurting “are the lone things desirable as ends” ( Mill 55 ) . The lone thing people should endeavor for is happiness and pleasance ; which is all the people of Omelas were making. Unfortunately. when a deeper analysis is taken of Mill’s “Utilitarianism” . one may detect many statements contradictory to this belief.
Every 1 who has this moderate sum of moral and rational necessities is capable of an being which may be called enviable ; and unless such a individual. through bad Torahs. or subjugation to the will of others. is denied the autonomy to utilize the beginnings of felicity within his range. he will non neglect to happen this enviable being ( Mill 62 ) .
This appears to depict the place that the immature kid who must endure is in. The kid is being subjected to the will of all others and therefore is being denied his/her ain autonomy to utilize the beginnings of felicity within his/her range.
Mill now goes on to proclaim that “it is universally considered merely that each individual should obtain that ( whether good or immorality ) which he deserves ; and unjust that he should obtain a good. or be made to undergo an immorality. which he does non deserve” ( 89 ) . The kid certainly did nil to merit the anguish that he/she is being put through. Consequently. it is unfair that the kid should be made to “undergo an evil” which he/she did nil to merit. Stressing the above statement is the cosmopolitan admittance that it is “inconsistent with justness to be partial ; to demo favour or penchant to one individual over another” ( Mill 90 ) . This is one time once more confirming that no individual can prefer the remainder of the population in Omelas over the immature kid simply because there are more people in the population than merely one kid.
Mill following makes the point. in relevancy to the state of affairs in Omelas. “do as one would be done by. and love one’s neighbour as oneself” ( 64 ) . Mill says that this entirely constitutes the “ideal flawlessness of useful morality” ( 64 ) . If the people were making to the kid what they would desire being done to themselves. so they would most decidedly non be leting the kid to be tortured.
These past two points. nevertheless seemingly sound. must be. in the terminal. negated. The footing for both the Golden Rule. and the “betraying a friend” points. is Utility. Both must be decided upon the greater good. While it would non be making to the kid as the people of Omelas would hold done to themselves. it is making for the people what the kid would desire to hold done to himself.
The instructions of Mill on page 57 province that a extremely endowed being would ever happen that any felicity he searched for would necessarily be imperfect. Yet this being has the ability to larn to bear its imperfectnesss. If this were true. the people of Omelas would be able to bear the imperfectnesss of the “normal” universe they one time lived in and. hence. have no demand to prosecute the “perfect” felicity and pleasances. This idea is besides backed by Mills statement that “the immoralities of the universe are in themselves removable. and will. if human personal businesss continue to better. be in the terminal reduced within narrow limits” ( 62 ) . If this is the instance. so there would be no ground. apart from indolence. to do this kid suffer in order to make about the same terminal as may be acquired through clip and finding. They would merely be taking the “easy road” to the concluding state of affairs. Besides. the statement made above that Utility “is an being exempt every bit far as possible from pain” ( 59 ) would non keep true what the people of Omelas are making. They believe that they are populating in an being free from hurting. yet a kid suffers a atrocious destiny full of mental and physical anguish.
The most outstanding and specifying statement Mill makes in respects to Omelas is that “Utilitarianism. therefore. could merely achieve its terminal by the general cultivation of nobility of character” ( 59. bold and italicization added ) . This shows that the lone manner Utilitarianism could be complete would be if the people’s character were of a baronial type. In the dictionary the word “noble” is defined as “Having or demoing qualities of high moral character. such as bravery. generousness. or award. ” The people of Omelas do non look to be of baronial character harmonizing to this traditional definition. They are. on the other manus. being barbarous to the kid and non holding any bravery to step up and free this kid. holding the bravery to confront the strivings and agonies of the “normal” life. Consequently. if being baronial is the lone true manner of obtaining Utilitarianism. so the people of Omelas can non be considered to be populating in a Utilitarian society.
Finally. due to the changeless screening and mass credence of the force and anguish being inflicted on the kid. it is really plausible that the citizens of Omelas would finally go so tolerant of force that their version of the perfect universe would let force. which would apparently render the “perfect” metropolis of Omelas in a blemished province.
Bibliography –
Le Guin. Ursula. “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas. ” In The Twelve Wind’s
Living quarterss. New York: Haper & A ; Row. 1975
Mill. John Stuart. “Utilitarianism. ” New York: Oxford University Press Inc. . 1998
