Someone who saves a person from drowning in the hopes of being paid for it is acting morally according to Mill. Why does he say this? Would Kant agree? Do you? Why or why not?,Someone who saves a person from drowning in the hopes of,Someone who saves a person from drowning in the hopes of being paid for it is acting morally according to Mill. Why does he say this? Would Kant agree? Do you? Why or why not?,More details;,To ,better understand the summary of the end of Chapter 2 (p.9-p.12), and the given portion of Chapter 3 (p.16-p.20) it may be beneficial to first summarize the primary points of Mill’s argument for utilitarianism. His theory is based on the principle that;,Additionally, “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, and wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.”,Generally, though it can differ in quality, he defines happiness as pleasure (or the absence of pain). To apply this to his theory, he concludes that to embrace utilitarianism as an ethic is to embrace that happiness is the sole basis of morality.,In chapter 2,, Mill attempts to defend his thesis against common critiques and misconceptions about utilitarianism. Many argue that his theory implies that utility is an opposition to pleasure. He replies, no, utility is define d as pleasure itself.,– Actions are good when they lead to a higher level of general happiness (and bad when they decrease that level),A particularly interesting fault found in Mill’s thesis is the opinion that the standard of happiness being the basis of morality implies a standard for morality that is too high for humanity. Rather, it is asking too much of people to always consider to promote the general interests of society. Mill somewhat agrees here. But furthers his argument by specifying that utilitarian moralism isn’t meant to be giving a defining framework for morality. This opposition would lead to condemning the individual, but instead simply encourages a motive of duty.,– The utilitarian motive has “nothing to do with the morality of the action” but moreso “with the worth of the agent” (pg.9),The above statement leads Mill into his next specification. He decides that the important considerations only must attend to private utility.,– Private Utility; the interest or happiness of some few persons,Examples of his argument include:,– EX: saving someone from drowning is “morally right” regardless of his motive being duty or hope that he is being paid for his trouble,– EX: he who betrays a friend that trusts him is guilty, even if his object be to serve another friend to whom he is under greater obligations,Lastly, Mill’s explanation completes with the premise that some pleasures must be ‘rate d’ superior to others. This is in order to prioritize heavily weighted happiness that may result in the best decision.,– Higher pleasures would be weight ed heavily by utilitarianism,Attachments,Click Here To Download,
Any Given Deadline
WEBSITE LIVE CHAT:
WHATSAPP: +1 (205) 286-5157
Online top tutor is a licensed Academic Writing Service created to offer academic help to students from all parts of the world. Our writing services are unique and offer more than just a piece of assignment. We have a pool of extremely qualified and experienced writers who do your assignments with dedication.