笔记：Mill

John Stuart Mill (1806-73)
                
                
Propounded and Developed the doctrine of Utilitarianism.
‘The only freedom which deserves the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it.’
Mill had to overcome objections made to the Benthamite version of ethical utilitarianism: everyone necessarily seeks his or her own pleasure, and that pleasure is the greatest good --> accused of
representing humankind as selfish and base.
Defense: it does not follow from this that we always act selfishly. (If not selfish, then what? If indeed selfish, so what?)
He also revised Bentham’s notion of pleasure: distinguishing between lower and higher pleasures.(**)
Powerful objection to regarding happiness as the highest moral value: happiness cannot be the supreme value because in so many situations we in fact put justice above happiness.
Mill's Response: although justice is highly important in the hierarchy of human values, it is nevertheless something that serves rather than rules the happiness principle. (Mill's argument does not fully succeed)
The theory has been developed, debated, and refined a good deal since Mill established it, and it provides a moral doctrine to which many individuals and political and social institutions subscribe wholeheartedly.
Act-utilitarianism and Rule-utilitarianism:
Act-utilitarians, when deciding what is the right thing to do, reflect on which act will produce the greatest happiness in a particular situation.
Rule-utilitarians resolve the issue by considering the consequences of the proposed act becoming a rule of action for everyone in like circumstances.
System of Logic: terms denote only particulars and that a general term such as ‘humankind’ does not denote an entity distinct from the individuals that together make up human kind.
The propositions of mathematics are not analytically true verbal conventions, but are synthetic and empirical.
Mill’s chief logical interest is in inductive reasoning: in induction we infer from the known to
the unknown rather than from past events to future events. (**)
Causality
Free will: Many of those averting from such a thought had tried to argue that the human will is exempt from causal determination and is therefore free. But Mill, like Hobbes and Hume before him, wants to assent both to a universal causality and to freedom of the will.
He argues that grave misconceptions have arisen concerning the term ‘necessity’:
Like all other causality, ‘only means that the given cause will be followed by the effect, subject to all possibilities of counteraction by other causes’ (赞成).
In Mill’s view, what necessity does not mean when applied to human action, is that an action is inevitable or uncontrollable. What it does mean is that given that one can know enough of a person’s character and disposition, then it is possible to predict what that person will do under particular circumstances. （赞成）
“When we say that all human actions take place of necessity, we only mean that they will certainly happen if nothing prevents” (different from casual laws).
On Liberty: we are justified in interfering with the actions of individuals only if they are harming others.
The Subjection of Women: it is because women have been subjected to male dominance that they have developed a certain mode of behaviour, and not because they are naturally disposed to
such behaviour. (**)