Graduate studies at Western
Prolegomena 5 (2):165-177 (2006)
|Abstract||This paper is a reply to Jonathan Riley’s criticism of my reading of Mill (both published in the Philosophical Quarterly 2003). I show that Riley’s interpretation has no textual support in Mill’s writing by putting the supposedly supporting quotations in their proper context. Secondly it is demonstrated how my reading is not incompatible with hedonism. Mill’s use of the concepts of ‘quality’, ‘quantity’, and ‘pleasure’ are explained and illustrated. I conclude by considering whether the possible redundancy of Mill’s quality/quantity discussion would be problematic|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Ville Kilkku (2004). The Significance of Tendencies and Intentions in the Moral Philosophy of J. S. Mill. Utilitas 16 (1):80-95.
Dale Dorsey (2010). Hutcheson's Deceptive Hedonism. Journal of the History of Philosophy 48 (4):445-467.
John Stuart Mill (2009). Utilitarianism. In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Exploring Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology. Oxford University Press.
Steven D. Hales (2007). Mill V. Miller, or Higher and Lower Pleasures. In Steven Hales (ed.), Beer & Philosophy. Wiley-Blackwell.
S. Evan Kreider (2011). Mill on Happiness. Philosophical Papers 39 (1):53-68.
Daniel Jacobson (2003). J.S. Mill and the Diversity of Utilitarianism. Philosophers' Imprint 3 (2):1-18.
Christoph Schmidt-Petri (2003). Mill on Quality and Quantity. Philosophical Quarterly 53 (210):102-104.
Jonathan Riley (2003). Interpreting Mill's Qualitative Hedonism. Philosophical Quarterly 53 (212):410–418.
Jonathan Riley (2008). What Are Millian Qualitative Superiorities? Prolegomena 7 (1):61-79.
Added to index2009-07-15
Total downloads78 ( #12,534 of 739,542 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,542 )
How can I increase my downloads?