Words: 757
Beneath came up with a guide named the calculus of felicity that included seven categories for choosing among efferent possible activities to promote one’s happiness or pleasures. John Stuart Mills, also an utilitarian, added to Bantam’s calculus because he did not fully agree with everything it stood for. Bernard Williams argued that utilitarianism is not a good moral theory and that it violates moral integrity. In this paper I will explain Bantam’s calculus Of felicity, Mill’s addition to the calculus, and Williams’ thoughts against utilitarianism.
The first category of the calculus of felicity is intensity which asked how intense are the pleasures likely to be. The second is duration. Duration offers to the question of how long the pleasures are to last. The third is certainty. The question of certainty is how certain are the pleasures. The fourth is propinquity which refers to how soon will the pleasures be available. Number five on the calculus is fecundity. Fecundity wants one to think about how many more pleasures will follow in their wake. Number six is purity.
Purity wants one to question how free from pain are the pleasures. Lastly, number seven is extent. Extent questions how many people will receive pleasure and be affected by your acts. Mills understood Bantam’s theory to be quantitative with a numerical analysis. Mills preferred to think of utilitarianism as a qualitative analysis. Mills believed in different types of pleasures. Pleasures of the body and pleasures of the mind. Mills considered the quantitative analysis to fulfill the “lower” desires, or the basic human desires. The “higher” desires are the ones dealing with quality.
Mills’ theory suggests that the lower quality pleasures are those of the body and the pleasures of the mind are the higher quality pleasures. Mills thought higher of the pleasures of intellect than that of pleasing our bodies. An example of this is giving someone a choice of having he price of beer reduced or continue paying to keep teachings of Shakespeare in schools. I believe Mills’ concern was that some people would most likely choose taking a price reduction in beer over Shakespeare. This would not be Mills’ choice and he would think this as humans satisfying his or her lower quality pleasures.
Williams believes that utilitarianism decisions are not based on any kind of moral ground and looks out for ones self interest only. Williams believes in a deeper meaning to things based on morals for not only oneself but Of others also. Williams gives a story in his writing of a man named George. George has been offered a job in a laboratory in which the research is in chemical and biological warfare. George refuses the job because he is opposed to biological ND chemical warfare. The man offering the job doesn’t understand George’s decision because George has a wife and kids at home to support.
The utilitarianism would agree that George should take the job. I believe Williams’ problem with this is the bigger picture that George is opposed to what the company stands for and the research he would be doing could ultimately affect a whole country. As Williams states in his writing, “A feature f utilitarianism is that it cuts out a kind of consideration which for some others makes a difference to what they feel about such cases: a consideration involving the idea, as we might first and very simply put it, that each of us is specially responsible for what he does, rather than for what other people do. (Williams) Integrity is compromised in the utilitarianism choice because it does not stand on a deep moral ideal. The choice to take the job would destroy George’s integrity by holding him responsible for something that he does not do about his opposing feelings and threatening the idea of his mandarins. I can appreciate the views of Beneath, Mills and Williams theories, but I personally agree with Williams’ concepts the most.
I agree with Williams that we as humans should take the whole situation, who it involves currently, and who it will potentially affect in the future. We should not just seek self pleasure. To dissect how much pleasure, for how long, and so on does not take into consideration the factor of long term effects. As for Mills’ conclusion that intellectual pleasure is best, that is just his opinion on expanding the mind. It does not give answers to everyday dilemmas.