A Critical Analysis Of Js Mills Attempt To Ground Justice In Utility
...of a particular action in terms of its tendency to produce happiness. Utilitarianism is, thus, a moral theory which rates the happiness of each individual as equally important and the aggregate happiness of all individuals involved as the basis of morality.
Outline of Mill's Argument
Initially, Mill establishes that it is often argued what is useful and leads to the greatest happiness may also lead to injustice. In this way it is often thought that the idea of utility can conflict with ideas of justice. Justice is taken as a more powerful binding force than usefulness because, as Mill concludes, it carries with it the feeling that punishment should occur if an injustice is done. Expediency, on the other hand, carries no such sanction.
The feeling that injustice warrants punishment is common to all forms of morality. Therefore, Mill distinguishes these other forms of morality from justice through the idea of perfect duty. Justice involves people's rights, whereas the rest of morality involves no rights. Therefore, if someone does not have a right to something then violation cannot be unjust, though it can be immoral.
Individuals hold rights as very important and something society should defend, because they tie in with our need for security. It is the strength of this need for security that makes us rate justice above utility. As noted by Mill, "the feelings concerned are so powerfulÂ…that right and should grow into must" . Justice is itself ultimately grounded in utility. Happiness and utility rely on the rights of each individual being protected, thus, justice protects each individual's happiness.
Justice and the ‘Ambiguous Internal Oracle'
In endeavouring to ground justice in utility Mill puts forward two essential arguments. Firstly, he sets out that all moral components to the idea of justice depend upon utility. Secondly, Mill sets out...
View Full Essay
