QUESTION SEVEN

7. Discuss the philosophy of Mill's utilitarianism (define) and compare/contrast it with Epicurus' hedonism (define). While they both speak of pursuing pleasure explain how each one means it. Compare and contrast their views.

mill's ethical theory is utalitarianism, which is based on the maximization of pleasure and minimization of pain. to mill, what defines good is pleasure, and evil is pain. so in order for one to reach true happiness, pain has to nullified and pleasure has to me maximized. mill's utalitarianism is in a way not any different than hedonism, but mill goes on a little further to claim that morality means promoting the greatest happiness to the most of society. for mill, happiness for oneself is not yet the final happiness that everyone seeks, but happiness for the whole entire society. what is important to mill's utalitarianism is not only the quantitative aspects of the pleasure ---like that of bentham's--- but also the qualitative aspects. mill's utalitarianism also introduces the idea of sanction, which is an incentive for individuals to focus not only on happiness for their individual self, but also for the benefit of the whole society.

epicurus' hedonism, is quite similar to mill's utalitarianism, only it's focused more on individuals rather than the entire society. for epicurus, pain and pleasure are the only intrinsic evil and good. so in order for one to achieve happiness, pleasure must be maximized and pain minimized. epicurus, however, claims that duration of the pleasure is much more important than intensity, and from this idea, he maintains that mental pleasure is therefore valued higher than physical pleasure. epicurus argues that peace of mind lasts longer than, say, sexual intercourse, because peace of mind is mental while sexual intercourse is physical. epicurus also pursues the idea of passive pleasure over active. such a thing as the absence of pain (passive) for epicurus is superior in pleasure than fulfilment of momentary desires (active), because the former lasts longer compared to the latter, which is, of course, momentary.

for both mill and epicurus, pleasure means the same thing: good. epicurus, however, focuses his ethical theory more on an individual while mill focuses his utalitarianism on a wider scope, that is the entire society. epicurus' hedonism, is more strictly focused on the absolute absence of pain; he maintains that such a thing results in the greatest happiness. for epicurus, as long as there is no pain whatsoever, getting no pleasure or much pleasure makes no difference. this idea differs from that of mill's utalitarianism. mill considers that the absence of pain does not mean the greatest happiness; one must also pursue to maximize happiness. so for mill, if one manages to nullify pain but cannot achieve happiness at the same time, then that means nothing. mill argues that one does not need to completely NULLIFY pain like epicurus' hedonism suggests, but as long as one can manage to obtain more pleasure than pain, one can be in the state of greatest happiness. so in epicurus' hedonistic term, mill is more of an active pleasure seeker, while epicurus maintains his passiveness.