I disagree with Mills view that higher pleasures are the best and that people should strive

towards those than lower pleasures. Mills talks about the view of peoples happiness, talking
about how people experience high and low pleasures; high pleasures to Mills are things that
come from a hard task that isnt mundane, so an example would be a lifes goal or an item of
achievement that is gained even through discomfort. Mills sees higher pleasures as more of a
higher faculty and being human in a way since humans have the capability to process things
such as happiness and emotions faster than animals. Lower pleasures to Mills are the pleasures of
day to day things or stuff that dont require much to achieve them, he states them as fools and
swine I of course saw those statements as something else than literal statements of being an
actual fool or a pig, he states that these creatures or people are those who act upon lower
pleasures because they are simple and dont use the higher function of the human brain, so being
like an animal who doesnt have the coherent thought process of the mind. (Mills, 18xx) So Mills
sees those who pursue a pleasure such as completing an everyday task such as clean your teeth or
finds more pleasure in playing the game pick up jacks as a lower pleasure and shouldnt really be
the main thing sought out for pleasure and definitely shouldnt make a person ignore a higher
pleasure which he sees as a better thing that gives a better result of happiness these would be like
long term goals such as building a shack to lifelong goals such as finishing your research on
some type of disease, it also can be things that would force a person to go through uncomfortable
situations or discomfort such as physical strain or mental strain to the human body and mind; all
of these factors between the two is what makes them different from the two the only similarity
they have that I can see is the both deal with pleasures, have a goal that is set to be made, results,
and deal with the mentality of things and their emotions to happiness.

I found a good quote from page nine where Mills says Few human creatures would
consent to be changed into any of the lower animals for a promise of the fullest allowance of a
beasts pleasure; no intelligent human being would consent to be a fool, no instructed person
would be an ignoramus, no person of feeling and conscience would be selfish and base,
(Mills, 18xx) What I believe mills is saying here is that human beings who know their worth or
know what they can do with knowing what they are and what knowledge could do for them, so
to want to be either a beast, a fool, or ignoramus because they either cant or want to have the
knowledge, skills, and capable mind and physical components that a human being has. The thing
I see from this quote is a person who would rather be a person or animal that is simple doesnt
realize what they will be loosing or what they will miss out on.
In Mills argument on how higher pleasures are better than lower pleasures he believes
that a person who has experienced a higher and a lower pleasure would always pick the higher
pleasures, Mills even believes that a person would even pick the higher pleasure even if they
have to go through discomfort or pain to achieve it. His view on this is that these so called higher
pleasures most likely being life goals or long term goals, an achievement that would be hard to
achieve or can cause harm either mentally or physically and can make things harder for the
person, that finally achieving it or becoming successful once the obstacle is completed the
amount of gratification from completing it will create a better amount of happiness or pleasure
that will make the person view this long goal created a higher pleasure or a greater amount of
pleasure leading to their happiness. From that a person could view that the easy mundane tasks
or obstacles such as every day tasks, short term goals, and just things that are either fleeting
happiness or something that can easily trigger that happiness as a lower pleasure and would see
them lesser than higher pleasures and would pursue that which is higher.

Mills argument with how higher pleasures are better than lower pleasures has a few
examples and scenarios, one being based upon those who sacrifice themselves are doing so to
provide others with happiness, so those who are martyrs sacrifice happiness for something
greater or for others and in doing this they are providing happiness for others so they wont
endure the pain or troubles that the martyr has decided to do. Yet the sacrifice is seen good if it is
to bring happiness or well being to others, but is seen not so wonderful if it doesnt bring or
create happiness or isnt directed in the purpose of happiness. (Mills, 18xx)
I would argue with this because even though a person is sacrificing themselves for others
it doesnt prove that it can bring happiness in the end even though the person intended to bring
happiness for others, some or maybe even all will see it as selfish because self sacrifice at time
for others could mean the loss or pain to a few others or many more even though that group is a
live or better off they can be succumbed to guilt, anger, sadness, depression. An example of this
would be like the story from the hobbit about the dwarves sacrificing their lives for their people,
for riches that would make them happy, but in the end some die and loose the family they create
on the journey by watching them die causing some to fall to sadness, anger, and guilt such as the
relationship between the dwarves, elves, and humans in the story and movie a like, all for a
treasure they believe would create happiness so they sacrifice every thing.
Mills also argues about how higher pleasures are better than lower pleasures, he talks
about how mans pleasures or desires are greater then those of an animalistic one and once a
person realizes theres a greater and higher pleasure, that they will go after that higher pleasure.
Showing that happiness is a person experiencing a higher faculties and how man chooses to
become uncomfortable or trade to gain a greater amount of happiness and if a person is given
equivalent access to any type of pleasure they would rather pick that which is higher, thus the a

person wouldnt choose to be an animal and an educated person wouldnt pick to become
ignorant. (Mills, 18XX)
I dont agree with this argument, mainly on the premises of a persons hopes, dreams, and
goals; along with emotions, the reason I state these is because a man whos hopes, dreams, or
goals become unattainable and the learn of this they may decide to forget the knowledge or
dismiss it and become ignorant towards it. Theres also the view where they achieve them and
once they are achieved they may see their life as mingles now because they achieved what they
wanted in life and now theres nothing to do their done or it becomes their only thing in life a
one hit wonder or idiot savant being only good at that one thing, then theres the chance they
loose everything else in life like loved one to achieve what they want. All of these can lead to a
spiral of depression or a good chance at it happening to them and all that can lead to slippery
slops such as death, crimes, and more, but all of these are speculations that actually do happen
not to everyone, yet it is likely. An example of this would be people like Isaac Newton, Robert
Boyle, and Gordon Brown who ended up with depression and anxiety, even clinical psychologist
believe success can lead to depression.
Another argument that Mills makes is the confusion between happiness and contentment,
he talks about how people who use higher faculties would be less content mainly on the premises
of them having a deeper sense of the limitations in our world, yet their pleasures are of a higher
characteristic than those of animals or a base human, thus the it is better to be a human being
dissatisfied than a pig satisfied (Mills, 18XX) So the people best suited to judge a pleasures
quality are those that have experienced both the higher and lower pleasures. (Mills, 18XX)
I view this with some distaste; why because of the view of those who know of the
limitations of our world have more pleasures than those who are content with not knowing, those

who have the knowledge are better to judge, I would say yes, but there are people who do know
and would rather be in the dark or never know the knowledge they were given, I do say that
those who have experienced both are best suited to judge which pleasures are better, but if the
news or man told me that theres no chance at creating space travel public or to be able to find or
create another home among the stars, I would either burn the knowledge or deny it and either
continue to hope or try to achieve it my self I would rather be ignorant on the subject because if
someone told me this it would most likely destroy me with all my hopes, dreams, and goals
which I do see being impossible in this time period of course, but theres still hope which is what
being ignorant to some information can be seen as sometimes, sometimes this can be a good
thing, mostly though it isnt, so I for one can still be happy and content with not knowing a piece
of information or straight out rejecting it even though I know it to be true.
With Mills arguments, I dont really accept them very well, I for one dont believe that a
higher pleasure is better than a lower one which I state a good reason in one of my conclusions
which talks about how even at times those who achieve what they want, they may not know what
to do next in their life causing them to become depressed or trying to achieve what they want
may cause a good amount of stress and cause them to become depressed and suicidal. To say that
a low pleasure cant be greater than the same as a higher pleasure is kind of a bit outrageous
because of how a low pleasure such as seeing your spouse laugh or smile can bring some great
happiness and if they disappear or die that happiness is gone achieve a higher pleasure such as a
life goal dont bring great happiness because they are gone and if a persons goal is the reason
behind them leaving or dying or they died and the person ignored them because of their goal then
the goal becomes bitter and filled with unhappiness. I think Mills gives a good reason for his
belief mainly because from what I read it didnt seem that he did a large amount of calculations

on how people would feel towards these and as well as his time period being way different to
mine, as well as our thoughts and minds, I couldve come up with scenarios and ideas that he
might have not thought of, I also could have taken what he said in a different light being that we
dont know each other and I cant ask him questions on what he means when he states
something, but Mills view is a bit sad because I see some great so called low pleasures as
being the butter to the toast of life such as just waking up and seeing someone you care about in
the morning say hi or smile at you bringing great happiness, so theres no true low pleasures and
high pleasures that are universal it all comes down to a persons taste in life, yes a person should
try two things before judging one, thats because people should expand their taste, but it all come
down to just what is called happiness or pleasure none of this high or low.

Bibliography
Mill, John Stuart. What Utilitarianism Is, Utilitarianism. George Sher (ed). 2nd edition.
(Indianapolis: Hackett, 2001)