Previous
Situational Irony
Chapter 1: General Remarks
Explanation and Analysis—Clear and Logical :
In "Utilitarianism," Mill writes in a style that emphasizes clarity, precision, and logical argumentation. Mill was known in his day for his ability to articulate complex philosophical ideas in a clear and accessible manner, and in this essay, he puts this skill to use in order to outline key utilitarian ideas to the general public. His primary goal in writing the essay is to clarify the utilitarian model of ethics previously articulated by figures such as Jeremy Bentham and Mill’s own father, James Mill. Mill believes that the public misunderstands utilitarianism due to previous mischaracterizations. He writes that some opponents of utilitarianism consider it a hedonistic, or pleasure-loving philosophy, while others make the opposite accusation that proponents of utilitarianism are ascetic or pleasure-denying. Hoping to clear up this general confusion, he adopts a writing style that is straightforward and concise, without unnecessary embellishments or overly technical jargon.
Additionally, Mill's style in "Utilitarianism" is characterized by its methodical structure. He begins by defining utilitarianism and its principles, then proceeds to address various objections and criticisms, offering rebuttals and clarifications along the way. This organized approach helps readers follow the progression of his ideas in a logical manner, beginning with what Mill considers to be the first step of any ethical philosophy, which is to first ask how we determine right from wrong. At the beginning of the essay, he writes:
When we engage in pursuit, a clear and precise conception of what we are pursuing would seem to be the first thing we need, instead of the last we are to look forward to. A test of right and wrong must be the means, one would think, of ascertaining what is right or wrong, and not a consequence of having already ascertained it.
Here, Mill engages in meta-ethics, or a discussion of how we make ethical distinctions. Other philosophers, he claims, often skip the necessary step of defining a methodology, instead discussing whether individual actions are moral or immoral. Mill, then, wants to proceed logically by first defining key concepts before explaining how his philosophy might evaluate any specific issues.
Related Themes:
