Want to learn the ideas in Utilitarianism better than ever? Read the world’s #1 book summary of Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill and George Sher here.
Read a brief 1-Page Summary or watch video summaries curated by our expert team. Note: this book guide is not affiliated with or endorsed by the publisher or author, and we always encourage you to purchase and read the full book.
Video Summaries of Utilitarianism
We’ve scoured the Internet for the very best videos on Utilitarianism, from high-quality videos summaries to interviews or commentary by John Stuart Mill and George Sher.
1-Page Summary of Utilitarianism
Overall Summary
Utilitarianism is a philosophy that argues for the greatest good for the greatest number of people. It was first proposed by Jeremy Bentham and further developed by John Stuart Mill in his essay, “Utilitarianism.” This guide follows the version collected in an anthology of Mill’s writings titled On Liberty, Utilitarianism, and Other Essays. The essay is divided into five chapters:
In the first chapter, Mill describes some of the general questions that concern any moral philosopher. He believes that morality is based on a few basic principles and has not developed much since ancient times. Most philosophers before him belong to two different schools of thought concerning ethics; one school says morality comes from human nature while another says it’s learned through experience. Both are incomplete because they haven’t specified what those foundational principles are or how we know them to be true. “Utilitarianism” fills this gap by arguing that all moral questions can be answered with an understanding of happiness (or pleasure) and pain, which it calls the Utility Principle
Chapter 2 focuses on the meaning of utilitarianism and the Utility Principle. Throughout the chapter, Mill responds to a series of common misconceptions about utilitarianism. He states that he does not mean pleasure in terms of satisfying animalistic desires, but rather higher forms of happiness only humans can enjoy. Moreover, Mill clarifies that his principle is concerned with actions that improve society as a whole rather than individual happiness alone.
Mill describes the sanction for utilitarianism in Chapter 3. He argues that each moral philosophy has a sanction, which is an individual’s conscience that creates a feeling of pain or remorse whenever they break the code. However, because humans are social beings who want to be part of society, they will follow the code of utilitarianism as it helps them achieve their desire to have a better society.
Chapter 4 contains Mill’s outline of what he believes is the proof of utilitarianism. He argues that it is impossible to prove that happiness is desirable beyond the fact that people desire to increase their happiness. For him, this proves the Utility Principle because people are acting in a way that increases their own pleasure or happiness.
The final chapter of “Utilitarianism” discusses the relationship between utility and justice. Mill argues that many people believe that a desire for justice is the basis for morality, rather than a desire for happiness or pleasure. Throughout this chapter, he attempts to prove that the desire for justice is a subcategory of the desire for happiness. He investigates what justice really means—a feeling connected to legal rights; it includes laws that do exist and laws that should exist. Justice is analogous to utility principle as it ultimately seeks to ensure good and happiness in society as whole.
Chapter 1: “General Remarks”
In the first chapter of Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill asserts that philosophers have made little progress in determining what is right and wrong. He argues that a proper philosophy is dependent upon clarity regarding basic morality, which has not been achieved since Greek times; however, he believes utilitarianism can provide this clarity.
Most moral philosophy is based on two schools of thought. Inductive ethicists believe that people must learn the principles of good and evil through experience, whereas intuitive ethicists think that these are innate to each person. Both groups agree that there is a set of rules guiding morality, but neither has defined them.
