PART 1 (HALF PAGE RESPONSE)
CHOOSE TO ANSWER ONE OF THESE PROMPTS AFTER READING THE TEXT THAT I WILL ATTACH BELOW:
Prompt 1: Why does Mill distinguish between so-called higher and lower qualitative pleasures? Do you think this distinction makes sense?
Prompt 2: What are some significant criticisms of utilitarianism, and how does Mill respond? Do you think his responses solve the problems?
Prompt 3: What is an application of the principle of utility to a current moral issue? Use any real-life example you want.
Only write half a page when answering one of these prompts. NO OUTSIDE SOURCES.
Each post should start with “Prompt 1” or “Prompt 2” etc., to let us all know which prompt(s) you are responding to.
The crucial thing to avoid in these discussions is writing about thoughts and ideas that are not relevant to the reading being discussed. In order for these discussions to be fruitful, they should be primarily used for trying to get clear on what an author is claiming, and the reasons he or she gives for the claims. In addition to the three required posts, I encourage you to post about your own thoughts regarding the thread’s issues, and to devote extra time to trying to understand the authors claims, raising questions, criticisms, and so on.
FOR THE OTHER HALF OF THE PAGE, WRITE A RESPONSE TO THIS RESPONSE ON PROMPT 1 (write it based on the pdf reading that I attached) (make it casual)
Mill points out the difference between higher and lower qualitative pleasures because he thinks that each action has different effects on the utility that people may get. Higher qualitative-pleasures action can provide more utility than low qualitative-pleasures action. Besides, Mill is trying to distinguish humans from other creatures. The difference between pleasures allows humans to pursue the higher one. Mill mentions this in his article that humans have preferred pleasure. For example, they will not choose to become an animal just for easily satisfied desires. This superiority is the difference between high qualitative pleasure and low qualitative pleasure. In my opinion, this distinction is understandable. We do experience different pleasures in our life and they are different in quality. For example, reading a book provides educated people knowledge. This action provides higher qualitative pleasure than eating. Eating can only fulfill the physical starving but it provides no help for the mental starving. However, I also think Mill’s distinction only applies to reasonable people. For example, as lazy people, sleeping does provide lower qualitative pleasure than taking a good class. But to them, sleeping is definitely a better choice than taking a class. At some times, Mill’s distinction does not explain people’s choices.