GUIDE TO THE PHILOSOPHY 1938 - 1947.pdf - Rare Books at ...

OBJECTIVE UTILITARIANISM 337
happiness C for himself, and an amount of happiness D
for three other people. Let us further assume that X
is greater than C, and Y is less than D, but that the whole
X plus Y is less than the whole C plus D. Then ought A
to choose action P or action Q?
According to Mill's first premise, namely that a man
can only desire his own greatest happiness, the choice
does not arise because A can only choose P, since X is
greater than C.
According to his second premise, that "each person's
happiness is a good to that person", A ought to choose
P, since he ought to pursue what is good.
But according to his third premise, that a. man ought
to promote the greatest happiness of the greatest number,
he ought to choose action Q,, on the ground that the total
happiness C plus D is greater than the total X plus Y.
The conclusion derived from the third premise is, then,
that a man ought to pursue something other than his own
pleasure, namely the greatest happiness of the greatest
number, and furthermore that he ought to pursue it even
if it conflicts with his own pleasure.
Now it may be argued that though this is giving up one
form of the hedonist position the form, namely, which
asserts that a man can only desire his own pleasure, it is
not giving it up in the form in which it asserts
that is pleasure the sole good; for by insisting that he
ought to promote the greatest happiness of the greatest
number, Mill is still maintaining that pleasure is the only
thing that ought to be pursued, although the pleasure in
question is no longer that of the agent.
But in maintaining that the individual ought not to
pursue his own pleasure always, but other people's pleasure
even at the cost of his own, we are admitting that the
individual can and ought to desire something which may
have no relation to his own pleasure, namely, the good
of the community. Now there is no necessary relation
between the good of the community and the individual's
pleasure.