Mill’s Greatest Happiness Principle and the Validity of Nozick’s Objections

$19.95

Add to cart
Essay #: 071080
Total text length is 14,515 characters (approximately 10.0 pages).

Excerpts from the Paper

The beginning:
An Analysis of Mill’s Ethical Theory of the Greatest Happiness Principle and the Validity of Nozick’s Objections to Hedonistic Utilitarianism in the “Experiment Machine”
This philosophical study will analyze the important utilitarian principles of Mill’s greatest happiness principle and the objections that Nozick implies through the “experiment machine.” Mill often details the ethical course of Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism to define a theory of values through a hedonic principle of the greatest happiness. Through Bentham, Mill sought an anthropocentric value of a higher order of intellectual ability in human nature to choose the greatest good for the greatest good of all. By pursuing pleasure as a course of action, Nozick...
The end:
..... for all because pain and “badness” are important aspects of human growth and development. These are the important ways in which Nozick effectively answers Mill’s anthropocentric view through hedonism, since pleasure is not the only important facet of living in the human condition.
References:
Bentham, J. (2010). The principles of morals and legislation. New York: Nabu Press.
Lawrence, M. (2004). Like a splinter in your mind: The philosophy behind the Matrix trilogy. New York: Wiley-Blackwell.
Mill, J. S. (2010). Utilitarianism. New York: CreateSpace.
Nozick, R. (1977). Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.
Schauer, F. (1995). Philosophy of law: Classic and contemporary readings with commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.