The arguments of the fourth chapter of 'utilitarianism' have been given considerable attention in recent years. the present article suggests that the major (and most controversial) part of the chapter is concerned not so much with the proof as with the kind of proof to which the principle of utility is susceptible. it is argued that the chapter progresses in an orderly manner to outline the kinds of considerations which would be necessary to show (a) that happiness is desirable as (...) an end; (b) that the general happiness is desirable as an end; and (c) that the general happiness alone is desirable as an end. as well it is maintained that mill's arguments are not susceptible to the traditional objections raised against them (the naturalistic fallacy; arguing from verbal to logical similarities; fallacy of composition.). (shrink)

This is a defense of John Stuart Mill’s proof of the principle of utility in the fourth chapter of his Utilitarianism. The proof is notorious as a fallacious attempt by a prominent philosopher, who ought not to have made the elementary mistakes he is supposed to have made. This book shows that he did not. The aim is not to glorify utilitarianism, in a full sweep, as the best normative ethical theory, or even to vindicate, on a more specific level, (...) Mill’s universalistic ethical hedonism as the best form of utilitarianism. The book is concerned only with Mill’s utilitarianism, and primarily with his proof of the principle of utility. The purpose is to show that Mill proceeds intelligibly and systematically in pursuing a well-defined project in the fourth chapter of Utilitarianism, and that he successfully defends what he sets out to establish in his proof of the principle of utility. (shrink)