This paper explores John Stuart Mill's utilitarian ethics framework and its application to significant personal decisions, particularly the choice between attending college or traveling the world. The analysis distinguishes between lower and higher pleasures, arguing that Mill's theory accounts for qualitative differences in human satisfaction beyond simple happiness. The paper demonstrates that meaningful life choices involve more than maximizing pleasure—they require considering the intrinsic value of intellectual and cultural experiences. Through Mill's defense against criticisms that utilitarianism reduces humans to animals, the paper shows how higher pleasures maintain human dignity while pursuing genuine contentment.
Decision-making can be one of the hardest things a person has to do. When facing a significant choice, each person differs in the reasons for which they select a particular path. For instance, when deciding what to do after high school, a person can either be content and unhappy by choosing to attend college to further their education, or be happy by choosing to travel the world instead. What motivates these decisions and actions that people make?
John Stuart Mill addresses this question through a memorable thought experiment. He reports that no one would willingly choose to lose thirty to forty points of IQ in exchange for a guarantee of a life full of basic pleasures. As Mill famously states, "It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied" (p. 25). This observation suggests that everyone faces decisions in life—whether to pursue formal education or follow their passion—and that such decisions should not rest solely on immediate happiness or contentment, but on something deeper about human nature and value.
A lot of thought and planning goes into a person's decision to attend college. It is not often that a person considers whether they would be happy while in college, but rather is encouraged by the overall outcome gained after college. Mill addresses how decisions should be made through his ethical theory of utilitarianism. According to Mill, the theory of utilitarianism is based on the idea that "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the wrong of happiness" (p. 16). To maximize pleasure, "The Greatest Happiness Principle" is the basis of his argument. Pleasure is the thing we want and what can motivate our actions and decisions. This theory indicates that our decisions are only right if they promote happiness and wrong if the outcomes are the opposite.
So, is college really the right choice? After all, a person endures intense stress, minimal sleep, an insurmountable amount of homework, and experiences unhappiness while enrolled in college. On the other hand, a person who chooses to travel the world believes that they have made the correct decision. While this person will not receive formal education, they will be happier visiting different parts of the world, learning about new cultures, and trying out different foods. Mill further defends the utilitarianism theory as "The Greatest Happiness Principle"—that is, pleasure and not pain. Pleasure is what we want and what can motivate our actions and decisions. Therefore, if choosing to attend college and the pleasure of gaining knowledge makes you unhappy, then that is the wrong decision because happiness is the measure of right action.
This moral principle makes sense because bringing pleasure and staying away from pain motivates our actions—it is what we fundamentally want. However, a basic criticism against "The Greatest Happiness" theory states that humans are just like animals and that the only thing that motivates our decisions is the desire for pleasure, which makes us into pigs or animals. According to this critique, a person knows what decision to make whether or not it brings the pleasure of happiness; that is the answer when deciding right and wrong. If the decision to go to college is made only because that person gets the pleasure of knowing they will eventually obtain a degree, a job, and make lots of money, then according to the critics, that person is merely an animal.
Conversely, Mill believes that as humans, we are capable of higher pleasures than just the animalistic ones. Pleasure is not the only good, nor is it the highest good in things people care about. Once people are made aware of their higher pleasures, they will never be satisfied without them. Mill argues that there are some decisions or outcomes that are better than others on instrumental grounds—meaning that some kinds of pleasures are intrinsically better and more valuable than others, whether the consequences they might cause are bad or good. The question then becomes: how can a person distinguish the difference between pleasures?
Mill addresses the criticism against his theory by arguing that distinguishing between kinds of pleasures must be based not just on quantity but also on the quality of the pleasure for decision-making. The first type he introduces is the lower pleasures, which involve the absence of pain. With world travel, for example, a person is free to do whatever they choose. They do not have to deal with the stressors of reality because of the disconnection from family and other life responsibilities. In this scenario, lower pleasures consist of freedom from obligation and stress.
In contrast, the higher pleasure would be the good that gives the most satisfaction and fulfillment. In order to achieve the most pleasure or satisfaction, Mill states that we should acquire what is considered the best of everything—the best foods, clothes, books, and intellectual pursuits. For Mill, a person will choose a pleasure of higher quality even if that pleasure brings some unhappiness and will not trade it for a greater amount of pleasure or happiness at a lower level. This principle raises the essential question: would a person willingly choose to lose thirty to forty points of IQ in exchange for a guarantee of a life full of basic pleasures?
Mill's answer is clear: a person will not choose to be a pig or to lower their IQ even though using their higher pleasures might involve some dissatisfaction. That person would prefer to keep their dignity and continue to be intellectually and culturally engaged. The capacity for higher pleasures—intellectual growth, cultural appreciation, and moral development—distinguishes humans from animals and defines what it means to live a truly human life.
"Argues quality of pleasure matters more than quantity in choice"
Mill argues that a person would only give up such IQ points only if they are extremely unhappy in life. As he states, "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" (p. 19). This final observation underscores Mill's conviction that human dignity and the pursuit of higher pleasures are so fundamental to human flourishing that we will abandon them only under conditions of genuine desperation. For most people facing ordinary decisions about education and life direction, Mill's framework recommends choosing paths that cultivate higher pleasures—intellectual growth, cultural understanding, and moral development—even if those paths involve struggle and temporary unhappiness. In doing so, we preserve what makes us distinctly human.
You’re 84% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.