Essay Undergraduate 662 words

Mill vs. Bentham: Utilitarianism and the Principle of Utility

~4 min read

Abstract

This paper examines John Stuart Mill's principle of utility, distinguishing it from Jeremy Bentham's formulation and evaluating utilitarianism as a basis for moral judgment. It begins by outlining Mill's consequentialist approach — which prioritizes the outcomes of actions over intentions — and his distinction between sensual and intellectual pleasures. The paper then contrasts Mill's rule utilitarianism with Bentham's act utilitarianism, highlighting how each thinker applies the greatest happiness principle. Finally, the author critically argues against utilitarianism as a universal moral instrument, citing its potential to justify harm to minorities and its problematic assumptions about the nature and timing of pleasure.

📝 How to Write This Type of Paper Writing guide — click to expand

▼

What makes this paper effective

It moves logically from exposition to comparison to critique, giving the argument a clear three-part structure that is easy to follow.
The use of concrete hypothetical examples — such as the single loaf of bread dilemma and the environmental taxation scenario — grounds abstract philosophical claims in accessible illustrations.
The critical section takes a genuine argumentative stance, offering two distinct objections to utilitarianism rather than simply summarizing existing views.

Key academic technique demonstrated

The paper demonstrates compare-and-contrast analysis within a philosophical framework. By defining Bentham as an act utilitarian and Mill as a rule utilitarian, the author isolates a meaningful conceptual distinction and uses it as the organizing principle of the comparison section. This technique — identifying a single, precise axis of difference — is a strong model for philosophy essays at the introductory undergraduate level.

Structure breakdown

The paper is organized into four sections: an introduction to Mill's consequentialist principle of utility; a discussion of secondary moral principles and how Mill applies utility to resolve conflicts between them; a direct comparison of Mill and Bentham; and a personal critical evaluation of utilitarianism, supported by two hypothetical counterexamples involving minority rights and intergenerational pleasure.

Introduction to Mill's Principle of Utility

John Stuart Mill reduced the categorical imperative to utilitarianism, arguing that it is the consequences of an action — whether good or bad — that determine its moral character. Mill's utilitarianism holds that the end result of the action is what matters morally, encompassing both sensual and intellectual pleasures. According to Mill, a human being's capacity for reasoning generally leads her to prefer intellectual pleasures over sensual ones. The principle of utility should therefore measure the consequences of an action rather than the intentions or character traits of the agent — as prescribed by, for instance, Kant's deontological ethics or doctrines of theological duty.

Mill's Secondary Moral Principles

Secondary moral principles underlie general moral principles, and Mill recommends his principle of utility as an instrument to be used wherever there is a dilemma between two conflicting secondary principles. For instance, the general moral principle is to promote happiness. One such dilemma concerns whether to give the single loaf of bread one possesses to oneself — when one is starving — or to another person who is equally starving. On the one hand, the moral principle of charity dictates the latter course of action, while the moral principle of self-preservation dictates the former. Mill's recommendation is to obey whichever principle would serve the greatest general happiness in that particular instance.

Comparing Mill and Bentham

Bentham's principle of utility differed somewhat from Mill's in that he proposed moral consequence arising from "the greatest good for the greatest number of people." Pain and pleasure, he argued, are our masters, and the hedonistic — or "felicific" — calculus should be used to determine this greatest happiness principle.

Bentham offers a general principle of utility and presents no specific rules, as Mill did. In this respect, the differences between Mill and Bentham can best be summarized by characterizing Bentham as an act utilitarian and Mill as a rule utilitarian. An act utilitarian uses reasoning to determine the greatest accruing utility in each individual situation, whereas a rule utilitarian calculates according to an established set of rules by which the greatest overall utility can be determined.

1 Locked Section · 200 words remaining

A Critical View of Utilitarianism as a Moral Standard · 200 words

"Objections to utilitarianism via minority harm and pleasure timing"

You’re 51% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.

130,000+ paper examples AI writing assistant Citation generator Cancel anytime

Key Concepts in This Paper

Principle of Utility Rule Utilitarianism Act Utilitarianism Greatest Happiness Hedonistic Calculus Secondary Moral Principles Consequentialism Pleasure and Pain Minority Rights Intergenerational Ethics