My question for Mill

October 30, 2008 ladyknowledge

I am still struggling with how many people we should consider when judging if our actions will increase overall happiness. I s it just our immediate family, community or country. Where do we draw the line before we go crazy? I remember the example that was brought up in one of our class sessions about the firefighter saving the Jewish man. In some Jewish cultures it is wrong to be saved by a firefighter because it goes again their biblical beliefs. Now should a firefighter ignore the wishes of the man and go in and save him, the firefighter would be happy, the community probably would be too. However should the mans family hear about the incident it would probably stir up controversy and decrease happiness.

Entry Filed under: Uncategorized

← Reach for the star if you fall then…..

Cheating… →

5 Comments Add your own

1. Joe Bird | October 30, 2008 at 7:03 am

I remember we were talking in our group about how whether or not we should consider animals to be a part of overall happiness. I think Mill needs to address this issue and also indicate whether or not beings with capablities or achieving lower pleasures will be graded or evaluated on a lower level. If someone was in a fire, would their families happiness decrease more if the fire fighter didnt even attempt to save the person and they died or if the fire fighter did in fact save the person?
2. lizpica9 | October 30, 2008 at 3:11 pm

I also struggle at times.. when like you said we should consider when judging if our actions will increase overall happiness… i think we should always make our immediate family happy and do what we can .. our part.. to help our community and country be a better place… no need to go crazy, little things .. acts of kindness will help making the overall happiness of the world greater… i think the example in class about the firefighter and the jewish man was really good for you to use in ur blog.. i thought it was a good example.. and made me think for a while.. do your job while loving it.. or be hated by someone who doesnt want your help.? it makes people think .. but good post
3. Jonathan R. | October 30, 2008 at 4:41 pm

I think Mill might say that there is a need to judge everyone. If you only judge an exclusive group (your family) then you don’t consider the affect it might have on the world (people who pull scams might think about the well being of their family but not the world). Mill might say if an action was to affect another human being in this world, then it would affect them very little. Example, if a spoiled teen was shopping and spending like crazy, other people in the city she is shopping might decrease overall happiness. But is the decrease significant enough to outweigh the girls happiness, no it isn’t. The person on the street might think about the instance for a second, an hour or a day; it wouldn’t decrease their happiness enough to outweigh the girls happiness.
4. Mike L | October 30, 2008 at 9:18 pm

It would probably be impractical to list everyone affected by an action. The chain of events that occur after any action could go on forever, but as time goes on, it is just insignificant in comparison to those immediately and/or directly affected
5. kenjones417 | October 30, 2008 at 9:22 pm

This is definitely an uncomfortable situation with utilitarianism. It almost seems like it is different person to person, situation to situation, and left up to the individual to figure out. I would have liked more examples and clarity on this.