{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Summum bonum the highest good philosophers over the

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ess, and jus2ce converge –  For Aristotle, this was called Eudaimonia –  The pursuit of happiness was consistent with the good of society •  With the rise of modern morality with Kant, Bentham, and Mill, a separa2on between these things emerges –  The pursuit of morality does not imply one’s own happiness –  Kant also says the pursuit of morality may be contrary to social jus2ce •  It requires that we treat everyone not as an end, but as a means •  Jus2ce is cannot always be universal, however –  With Mill, we have a separa2on between jus2ce and morality •  Each of these spheres has their own logic U)litarianism (1861) “From the dawn of philosophy, the ques2on concerning … the so called sophist.” –  Summum bonum: the highest good –  Philosophers over the last 2000 years have been unable to agree about what the supreme good for the human being is Mill is referencing Aristotle – the supreme good for the human being only takes place within society Mill is saying he’s going to argue the same thing Socrates argued when he spoke against the morality of the 2me Was Socrates arguing for u2litarianism? No, Socrates and Plato were proto ­deontologist Mill is wri2ng for an educated readership, not philosophers. On the irrefutability of happiness •  P. 4 “On the present occasion, I shall, without further discussion of the other theories … but what proof is it possible to give that pleasure is good?” –  Morality is based on u2lity and happiness, but Mill will not (one cannot) explain why we ought to pursue u2lity and happiness –  For Kant, the moral good can be proven ra2onally –  For Mill, the pursuit of good for the greatest number is an axiom that cannot admit of proof Pain is not quan2ta2ve, but qualita2ve •  P. 7 “ The creed which accepts as the founda2on of morals … and to what extent this is lem an open ques2on.” –  This raises the ques2on: Is happiness always unaccompanied by pain? –  This is Mill’s version of the Benthamite calculus •  Pain is not merely physical and not merely quan2ta2ve Happiness is not unalloyed •  We pursue a moral act for the sake of happiness and u2lity and pleasure –  Mill wavers back and forth between the concepts –  Happiness, though, is not unalloyed –  We need moral character to determine what the acceptable mix is •  One m...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}