Salt Lake Community College

Introduction to Philosophy
Philosophy 1000-016
Instructor: Alexander Izrailevsky
Individual Creative Paper
Written by: Lissann Lichtenstein
ePortfolio link: http://foreverlearning14.weebly.com/phil-1000.html

While there is no one philosophy that we discussed in our class I fully

agreed with, the philosopher I was most interested in was John Stuart Mill
(and in a way, David Hume). Many consider John Stuart Mill as the greatest
British philosopher of the 19th Century. He grew up in what many would
consider an unfeeling environment. His father, James Mill was a philosophy
professor and friends with philosopher Jeremy Bentham. These two men
believed that all minds are the same at birth and that proper education
begun early enough would produce a healthy rational child. Therefore,
John Stuart became the test subject to prove that this theory was correct.
He was heavily educated and, by the age of 25, he was considered the most
educated man in the world. However, his lack of any life other then
education took an extreme emotional toll on John Stuart. He was broken
emotionally and very depressed. Later in life, he fell in love with Harriet
Taylor, who had a great influence on his beliefs and philosophical
perspective. He wrote many books and articles in his lifetime. And, in 1873,
John Stuart died in Avignon after developing a high fever.

Probably the philosophical point that Mill is best known for is

utilitarianism: the doctrine that actions are right if they are useful or for
the benefit of a majority (Utilitarianism) and therefore it is morally
necessary to consider the objective results of your social actions as more
important than your intentions. In this striving to find what is right and
beneficial, Mill rejected the teachings of Bentham who stated that all

pleasures are level. Mill believed that we as humans give more preference
to certain pleasure over others (as long as one is fully acquainted with
them). His explanation as to why this is is something I found myself in huge
agreement with: Now it is an unquestionable fact that those who are
equally acquainted with, and equally capable of appreciating and enjoying,
both, do give a most marked preference to the manner of existence which
employees their higher faculties. Few human creatures would consent to be
changed into any of the lower animals, for a promise of the fullest
allowance of a beasts pleasures; no intelligent human being would consent
to be a fool, no instructed person would be an ignoramus, no person of
feeling and conscience would be selfish and base, even though they should
be persuaded that the fool, the dunce, or the rascal is better satisfied with
his lot than they are with theirs. They would not resign what they possess
more than he for the most complete satisfaction of all the desires which
they have in common with him. If they ever fancy they would, it is only in
cases of unhappiness so extreme that to escape from it they would
exchange their lot for almost any other, however undesirable in their own
eyes. A being of higher faculties requires more to make him happy, is
capable probably of more acute suffering, and certainly accessible to it at
more points, than one of an inferior type; but in spite of these liabilities, he
can never wish to sink into what he feels to be a lower grade of existence.
(Soccio) In other words, because one is educated, they require more out of

life to fully be happy and that happiness is found in ideas that require more
effort to obtain results.

Mill was an advocate for the advancement of all people, something I

highly admire about his philosophy. Many other philosophers focused mainly
on the men of their society alone. But he taught that political democracy,
the power with the whole of the people, is moral and that there was the
great danger of the tyranny of the majority. He was an advocate protection
of womens rights (including protecting their right to education and culture;
allowing them the same social opportunities) and minoritys rights. He also
believed that it is moral for every child to get an excellent cultural
education since education leads to being able to prioritize experiences and
therefore find individual happiness. He also taught that all people should be
given unlimited individual freedom. Ironically, this unlimited individual
freedom came with three limitations (all of which I find very reasonable):
One. A person cannot violate the law of the land in pursuit of their
individual freedom,
Two. Children are not included in the idea of unlimited individual
freedom, but those with that freedom should protect them,
And three. A person can never impose your freedom onto someone
else, especially violently.

With his position on the power of the individual and the need for their
freedom, it made sense that Mill would pattern part of his moral philosophy
after that of Protagoras and David Hume. Mill taught about Hedonism (the
essence of morality is happiness and happiness is to be understood as the
sum total of ones pleasures minus the some total of their pain or effort)
and Moral Individualism (personal happiness has a strong moral priority
over the happiness of my social groups). He taught about Moral Relativism
(as many people, as many morals), Moral Situationalism (moral judgment is
always situational), Moral Conventionalism (morality is always an
agreement/convention), and Moral Pragmatism (morality has to be helpful,
useful, and practical).

Mills epistemology, otherwise known as: the theory of knowledge,

esp. with regard to its methods, validity, and scope. Epistemology is the
investigation of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion
[Epistemology], is very focused on the scientific, physical world around us.
He believed in empiricism, that human knowledge is based on sensual
experience, and that all ideas need to be checked up and verified with
statistical and factual evidence. While science and fact are major
components of our worlds function, I cannot agree with his need to verify
everything with fact. I believe this idea of his stemmed, in part, from the
fact he was an agnostic. Personally, as a Christian, I can say that there are
many ideas that I believe in and know to be true in my life that cannot be

verified with sensual facts and statistics. They are things that I can accept
on faith. However, there are studies being conducted now, here in Utah,
trying to see if there is a connection in our brains that is made when we
experience something spiritual. Maybe, with these studies, we can one
day satisfy Mills need for evidence in all things within parts of religion and
show the physical difference it makes.

As I have looked over the philosophies and ideas of John Stuart Mill, I
realized that my only real concerns come from his epistemology, as I stated
above. His belief in the power of the individual, no matter who they are,
probably will always appeal to those who are a minority of some kind, which
includes me. To live in a society where all have equal rights to accomplish
their goals regardless of mitigating factors, to me, sounds like a version of
Utopia. However, as much as I would like his idea of unlimited individual
freedom, I believe it cannot exist within our modern day society. As a whole,
the major powers in our country and our world are so focused on
themselves and their interests that they cannot allow the interests of others
to even be anywhere near their plans. We also live in a society where
discontentment with other individuals, larger parties, even the government
is taken into individuals hands and laws are broken to show that
displeasure. Both these attitudes make it impossible to fulfill the other
limitation (when one is only interested in their own gain, they arent going
to be very focused those who cannot protect themselves) and so unlimited

individual freedom is not possible. But there is hope within his philosophy. If
the other practices of his moral philosophy (e.g. moral situationalism and
moral relativism) are better understood, implemented and respected, a new
environment of tolerance and kindness is created. And when we learn that,
we can see that allowing everyone the opportunity to have his or her own
freedoms is what truly benefits the society as a whole, bringing about the
utilitarian dream John Stuart Mill envisioned.

Bibliography:
Epistemology. The New Oxford American Dictionary Second Edition. New
York: Oxford
UP, 2005. Electronic.
Personal class notes

Soccio, Douglas J. The Utilitarian: John Stuart Mill Archetypes of Wisdom:

An
Introduction to Philosophy Sixth edition. United States, Holly J. Allen.
2007.
Print.
Utilitarianism. The New Oxford American Dictionary Second Edition. New
York: Oxford
UP, 2005. Electronic.