be used an objection to utilitarianism in particular. In other words, defenders of other opposing ethical systems can’t claim any advantage over utilitarianism since they are plagued by the same problem.**Clarification: It is important to note that Mill is not saying here that it’s morally ok when people abuse the principle of utility. Mill would still say that it is wrongto make an exception to the rules in cases where breaking the rule doesn’t really produce greater happiness overall. That’s why Mill stressed we have to place limits upon the allowable exceptions to truth-telling. Let’s review one more objection that Mill responds to.The no time to calculate objection:this objection is based on the idea that an ethical theory should be practical: it should be able to guide us in our decision making. An ethical theory which is impossible to use in guiding our decision making just isn’t a good ethical theory. -According to the “no time to calculate” objection, it is impossible to guide our conduct by utilitarianism. The guidance utilitarianism gives us is to follow the principle of utility and do whichever action will promote the most happiness overall. But according to the no-time objection, when deciding how to act there is never enough time to calculate and figure out which of our available actions will promote the greatest overall happiness of everyone affected. And so “do what promotes the greatest happiness overall”is not a good practical ethical guide for making decisions.-Mill’s first reply to the “no time” objection. Mill argues that it is a mistake to think that in order to guide our conduct by the principle of utility we have to, on each occasion, spend time calculating and figuring out what sorts of consequences our actions will have for the happiness of those affected. Rather, Mill claims, as a human species humankind has already had plenty of time to learn through experience what types of conduct promotes happiness and what kinds of conduct does not. In that case, Mill thinks that for the most part human beings already know from past experience (or the past experiences of previous human beings) what types of conduct tends to promote the most happiness overall. And thus in most situations we don’t really need to spend time calculating the effects of our actions; usually all we need to do is rely upon this knowledge of past experience to guide us in determining which course of action is most likely to promote the greatest happiness overall. Mill has a second response to the no-time objection, which builds upon the first. Mill argues that the objection rests upon the mistakenassumption that utilitarianism says people must always appeal directly to the principle of utility whenever they make moral decisions. Mill argues that we don’t really have to dothat. Rather, in most cases we can instead rely on ‘secondary principles’ or ‘subordinate principles’. What
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 9 pages?