Happiness: John Stuart Mill vs Immanuel Kant :: Utilitarianism Essays

Happiness. People go to any message by which to obtain the many varied materials and issuesthat induce pleasures in severally individual, and intrinsically, this emotionremains the ultimate goal, John Stuart Mill, a nineteenth one C philosopher,correctly advocated the pursuit of gaiety, and maintained the concept thatabove all opposite values, pleasure existed as the final destination, Millshedonistic trip ups correctly and rationally determine a natural human tendency,and his Utilitarian arguments strongly support the surmisal that above all else, gratification is the most important dream to be fulfilled. Upon researching forthis paper, I came across a counter argument, which was based on metaphysics.Immanuel Kant, in Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, defends his strongbeliefs in the issue of a good will, and surfaces as MMs chief opponent on thetopic of metaphysics, The issue diminishes to a clash between emotions andpleasures ve rses rationality and logic. Yet, wha t use is logic when the goodagent is crushed? Mills stance within Utilitarianism exists as the morefavorable of the two beliefs, for happiness exist as the one intrinsicallyfavorable element, not an passionless mind.The main defender of the Utilitarian system exists within the Greatesthappiness Principle. Mill lived as a chief advocate of this concept, whichsupports the idea that a decision is morally correct as long as it increases andencourages pleasures and happiness. Kant, however, in his endless quest toremain separate from emotions and thrive only on logic, would argue thatautonomy should be placed above happiness in a list of intrinsic values. A goodwill, however, does not sympathizer an individual in any way if happiness does not keep abreast this asset, Consider this example of a seemingly happily marriedcouple. The married womanhood in this duo is madly in love with her husband fiercely loyal,and completely happy with her marriage and children. The husband, however, a swrongfully strayed, and had a brief, save damaging affair behind his wifes back.Kant would argue that autonomy reigns over pleasure, and the woman shouldtherefore want to be informed of her husbands adultery, Mill would greatlydisagree. By revealing the secret of the past affair, the womans happy worldwould be flat shattered. Her pride would diminish, her stability wouldfall apart, and the children especially would be forced to view a nasty side oftheir beloved father. In this case, individual throw is greatly overshadowedby the need for happiness. The husband is no longer acting unfaithful and thefamily can easily continue to live in a happy realm, If the secret were to