Does Mill's account of justice provide adequate protection for the individual? What safeguards does Mill provide, and how might these safeguards fail?
What are some of the benefits and problems with having utility as the one standard by which to judge all pleasures? (Think particularly about the issue of commensurability.)
Why does Mill say that utilitarianism can't be proven? What "considerations" does he offer in favor of the theory?
How does Mill define happiness? How does this affect utility as a measuring device?
Why is Mill so concerned about showing that his theory allows for ultimate sanctions? Do you agree with Mill that punishment is the essence of morality?
Pamela is walking through the forest when she happens upon a man who is about to kill five people. He tells her that if she kills one of those people, he will let the other four go free. Pamela has reason to believe he will keep his promise. What would Mill say she should do, and why? If you disagree with Mill, explain why.
How does impartiality fit into Mill's arguments for utilitarianism? Is his assumption correct that morality requires impartiality?
Mill structures much of his essay as a reply to previous criticisms about utilitarianism. How does this affect Mill's presentation of his arguments? Stylistically, does this add or detract from Mill's discussion?
What is the role of education and socialization in Mill's theory? To what degree does Mill believe people's values are shaped by their social environment?
Readers' Notes allow users to add their own analysis and insights to our SparkNotes—and to discuss those ideas with one another. Have a novel take or think we left something out? Add a Readers' Note!