(or appropriate). This is a distinct and narrower notion of theory’ which I use in this ‘moral paper unless otherwise specified. Classical utilitarianism no doubt provides an ethical or moral theory on both definitions just discussed. In the statements of Jeremy Bentham and J.S. Mill, though, it appears more obviously to be a moral or - to use Mill’s word - As Mill puts it: creed doctrine creed. ‘[t]he that accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.’ Mill goes on to explain what he means by happiness and its reverse, but adds that give a clear view of the moral standard set up by the theory, ‘[t]o much more requires to be said’ and adds that supplementary explanations do not ‘these affect the theory of life on which this theory of morality is grounded namely, that pleasure, – and freedom from pain, are the only desirable ends’ (Mill, 1962, 257). Henry Sidgwick’s use of terms is a little different. In Sidgwick The Methods of Ethics starts by noting that is, at the present day, in common use, and is supposed to ‘Utilitarianism designate a doctrine or method with which we are all familiar’ (Sidgwick, 1981, 411). Nonetheless, Sidgwick notes that seems to be applied to several distinct theories’ so that ‘it he needs to give a more precise definition. His definition runs: Utilitarianism is here ‘[b]y meant the ethical theory, that the conduct which, under any given circumstances, is objectively right, is that which will produce the greatest amount of happiness on the whole; that is, taking into account all those whose happiness is affected by the conduct’ (Sidgwick, 1981, 411). Here theory’ might easily be replaced by principle’. Nonetheless, ‘ethical ‘moral Sidgwick also thinks that ethics must provide a ethical theory’ of the sort Williams ‘positive has in mind since for him: aim of Ethics is to systematise and free from error the ‘[t]he apparent cognitions that most men have of the rightness or reasonableness of conduct, whether the conduct be considered as right in itself, or as the means to some end commonly
(or appropriate). This is a distinct and narrower notion of ‘moral theory’ which I use in this paper unless otherwise specified. Classical utilitarianism no doubt provides an ethical or moral theory on both definitions just discussed. In the statements of Jeremy Bentham and J.S. Mill, though, it appears more obviously to be a moral doctrine or - to use Mill’s word - creed. As Mill puts it: ‘[t]he creed that accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.’ Mill goes on to explain what he means by happiness and its reverse, but adds that ‘[t]o give a clear view of the moral standard set up by the theory, much more requires to be said’ and adds that ‘these supplementary explanations do not affect the theory of life on which this theory of morality is grounded – namely, that pleasure, and freedom from pain, are the only desirable ends’ (Mill, 1962, 257). Henry Sidgwick’s use of terms is a little different. In The Methods of Ethics Sidgwick starts by noting that ‘Utilitarianism is, at the present day, in common use, and is supposed to designate a doctrine or method with which we are all familiar’ (Sidgwick, 1981, 411). Nonetheless, Sidgwick notes that ‘it seems to be applied to several distinct theories’ so that he needs to give a more precise definition. His definition runs: ‘[b]y Utilitarianism is here meant the ethical theory, that the conduct which, under any given circumstances, is objectively right, is that which will produce the greatest amount of happiness on the whole; that is, taking into account all those whose happiness is affected by the conduct’ (Sidgwick, 1981, 411). Here ‘ethical theory’ might easily be replaced by ‘moral principle’. Nonetheless, Sidgwick also thinks that ethics must provide a ‘positive ethical theory’ of the sort Williams has in mind since for him: ‘[t]he aim of Ethics is to systematise and free from error the apparent cognitions that most men have of the rightness or reasonableness of conduct, whether the conduct be considered as right in itself, or as the means to some end commonly
Theory_or_approach_final.docx