J. S. Mill

Alright, so it seems that this guy is going to explain to us how we can just look at pain and pleasure and the relationship to morality. I would say that this makes sense in a very broad sense but can be discredited if it is too broad. I hope that Mill narrows his explanation of the relationship between pain/pleasure and morality so that I understand exactly where is argument is coming from. I would guess that he is trying to say that we want to give someone pleasure because that is the definition of being moral. We must also note, then, that not everyone is going to want to become moral by this definition. Some people will not behave morally because there is no recognition of why we behave morally. Unlike Kant, this definition does not require that the person submit themselves to a distinct duty. This new moral code believes that it takes a person to choose to do a moral act for the sake of doing a moral act. Kant, on the other hand, believes that a person will act moral if he or she notes that all people will act in that manner. In his view, we all have duties and can gain rights through everyone fulfilling these duties. We will see what the real Mill arguments are and how he defends them in the near future.