A Moral Contradiction in a Moral Principle: Utilitarianism.
John Stuart Mill was one of the greatest philosophers of the 19th century. Mill was best renowned for his idea of "Utilitarianism."" Utilitarianism originated from an ethical principle under Jeremy Bentham, who theorized an action is right if it produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Mill revised the concept of utility and has brought forth "the Greatest Happiness Principle."" Perhaps against this doctrine commences a dissent to those who say that happiness in any form cannot be the rational purpose in human life. These objectors state that the principle of utility is simply unattainable. In the short story, "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas- by Ursula Le Guin, strict utilitarianism is presented. To what doctrine allows a morality action based on the pain of one or few to provide the greater part happy?.
Mill emphasizes the Greatest Happiness Principle as, one's actions are right if they tend to promote happiness; wrong, as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness, meaning the promotion of pleasure and the prevention of pain. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, the promotion of pain and the privation of pleasure. According to the Greatest Happiness Principle, whether we are considering our own good or that of other people, we must act in a way that exempt us as much pain as possible and encourage as much happiness as we can, both in quantity and quality. If one was presented with two choices, a utilitarian is obligated to choose the action that benefits the greatest amount of people. For instance, middle-east countries are constantly at war. In Palestine, suicide bombers are "told- that if they sacrifice their lives, their family would be compensated for the rest of their lives. In this example, one must choose what they feel would be better for the greater part, in this case their family.