The ‘philosophy of swine’ objection is not a decisive criticism of utilitarianism. I will show this through advancing Mill’s response to the ‘swine’ objection, which states that humans should seek out higher pleasures over lower pleasures. Because ultimately a society which does not perceive higher pleasures as better and more pleasurable would be one which leads to disutility.
Mill’s Utilitarianism:
In Mill’s ‘Utilitarianism’ he states that utilitarianism is a moral theory which promotes the greatest amount of pleasure for the greatest number of people. That people should seek pleasure and avoid pain. The Trolley cart example illustrates the fundamental premise of utilitarianism. This is where if a utilitarian saw three people chained to one railway track, and one person chained to another, the utilitarian would move the train off its natural course in order to kill the one person to save the three. This is promoting the greatest pleasure for the greater number of people. Utility is measured using a metric that adds up pleasure and subtracts pain, where we add up the expected amount of utility an action would cause in order to decide whether or not to do that …show more content…
This links to Mill’s quote “I would rather be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied”. Humans should strive to better themselves and the greatest utility will be gained by improving society in addition to seeking personal happiness. If we only sought out swine pleasures how would we know the benefits of the higher pleasures, as what we don't know could be what we want. A society in which everyone only desired swine pleasures would lead to disutility because people would be seeking immediate pleasure and gain without wanting to further themselves, or develop as a person, or a society. We can realise this when we think of the unhappy drug user mentioned