Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T08:49:18.694Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

J.S. Mill on Calliclean Hedonism and the Value of Pleasure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2018

TIM BEAUMONT Open the ORCID record for TIM BEAUMONT [Opens in a new window]
TIM BEAUMONT*
Affiliation:
Sun Yat-sen University, Zhuhai
*
*<[email protected]>
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Maximizing Hedonism maintains that the most pleasurable pleasures are the best. Francis Bradley argues that this is either incompatible with Mill’s Qualitative Hedonism, or renders the latter redundant. Some ‘sympathetic’ interpreters respond that Mill was either a Non-Maximizing Hedonist or a Non-Hedonist. However, Bradley’s argument is fallacious, and these ‘sympathetic’ interpretations cannot provide adequate accounts of: Mill’s identification with the Protagorean Socrates; his criticisms of the Gorgian Socrates; or his apparent belief that Callicles is misguided to attempt to show that the pleasures of the intelligent can be more valuable than the pleasures of fools without also being more pleasurable.

L’hédonisme maximisateur maintient que les plaisirs les plus plaisants sont les meilleurs. Francis Bradley soutient que soit cela est incompatible avec l’hédonisme qualitatif de Mill, soit cela rend ce dernier redondant. Certains interprètes bien intentionnés répondent que Mill était soit un hédoniste non-maximisateur, soit un non-hédoniste. L’argument de Bradley est toutefois fallacieux et ces interprétations bien intentionnées ne peuvent rendre compte de manière adéquate de l’identification de Mill avec le Socrate protagorien, de ses critiques du Socrate gorgien, ni de sa conviction apparente que Calliclès a tort de tenter de montrer que les plaisirs de la personne intelligente peuvent être plus précieux que les plaisirs de l’idiot sans pour autant être plus plaisants.

Keywords

Francis H. BradleyCalliclesHedonismJ.S. MillPlatoutilitarianismvalue
Type
Original Article/Article original
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 58 , Issue 3 , September 2019 , pp. 553 - 578
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beaumont, Tim 2018 “J.S. Mill’s hedonism: activism, experientialism and eudaimonism.” Forthcoming in British Journal for the History of Philosophy. DOI: 10.1080/09608788.2017.1420627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentham, Jeremy 1907 An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Oxford: Clarendon Press [1843].Google Scholar
Bradley, Francis H. 1927 Ethical Studies. Oxford: Clarendon Press [1876].Google Scholar
Brink, David 1992 “Mill’s Deliberative Utilitarianism.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 21 (1): 67–103.Google Scholar
Brink, David 2003 “Introduction,” in Prolegomena to Ethics. By Green, T.H., edited and introduced by Brink, David O.. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. xiii-cx.Google Scholar
Brink, David 2013 Mill’s Progressive Principles. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capaldi, Nicholas 2012 John Stuart Mill: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carlyle, Thomas 1850 Latter Day Pamphlets. London: Chapman.Google Scholar
Crisp, Roger 1997 Mill on Utilitarianism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Devigne, Robert 2006 Reforming Liberalism: J.S. Mill’s Use of Ancient, Religious, Liberal, and Romantic Moralities. New Haven: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donner, Wendy 1991 The Liberal Self: John Stuart Mill’s Moral and Political Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Donner, Wendy, and Fulmer, Richard 2009 Mill. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorsey, Dale 2013 “The Authority of Competence and Quality as Extrinsic.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 21 (1): 78–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoag, Robert 1987 “Mill’s Conception of Happiness as an Inclusive End.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 25 (3): 417–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lachs, John 2014 Freedom and its Limits. New York: Fordham University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemos, Noah M. 1994 Intrinsic Value: Concept and Warrant. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loizides, Antis 2013 John Stuart Mill’s Platonic Heritage: Happiness Through Character. Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Loizides, Antis 2014 “Mill on Happiness: A Question of Method.” British Journal of the History of Philosophy 22 (2): 302–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mill, John S. 1963–1991 The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. 33 vols., gen. ed. Robson., John M. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. In-text references are to volume and page number.Google Scholar
Miller, Dale 2010 J.S. Mill: Moral, Social and Political Thought. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Nordquest, David 2016 “Mill and the Gorgias.” Utilitas 28 (1): 19–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Packe, Michael 1954 The Life of John Stuart Mill. London: Martin Secker & Warbourg.Google Scholar
Priestley, Francis E.L. 1969 “Introduction,” in The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Volume X. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Riley, Jonathan 1999 “Is Qualitative Hedonism Incoherent?” Utilitas 11 (3): 347–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, Jonathan 2003 “Interpreting Mill’s Qualitative Hedonism.” The Philosophical Quarterly 53 (212): 410–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, Jonathan 2009 “Millian Qualitative Superiorities and Utilitarianism, Part II.” Utilitas 21 (2): 127–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, Jonathan 2014 “Different Kinds of Pleasure,” in Mill’s A System of Logic: Critical Appraisals, edited by Loizides, Antis. New York: Routledge, pp. 170–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robson, John M. 1978 “Textual Introduction,” in The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Volume XI. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Saunders, Ben 2010 “J.S. Mill’s Conception of Utility.” Utilitas 22 (1): 52–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, Ben 2011 “Reinterpreting the Qualitative Hedonism Advanced by J.S. Mill.” Journal of Value Inquiry 45 (2): 187–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, Ben 2017 “Mill’s Conception of Happiness,” in A Companion to Mill, edited by Macleod, Christopher and Miller, Dale. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell: pp. 313–327.Google Scholar
Scarre, Geoffrey 1996 Utilitarianism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Scarre, Geoffrey 1999 “Happiness for the Millian.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 7 (3): 491–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt-Petri, Christoph 2006 “On an Interpretation of Mill’s Qualitative Utilitarianism.” Prolegomena 5 (2): 165–177.Google Scholar
Skorupski, John 2007 “The Philosophy of John Stuart Mill.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 15 (1): 181–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sparshott, Francis E. 1978 “Introduction,” in The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Volume XI. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Sturgeon, Nicholas 2010 “Mill’s Hedonism.” Boston Law Review 90: 1705–1729.Google Scholar
Whedbee, Karen 2007 “An English Plato: J.S. Mill’s Gorgias.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 37 (1): 19–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Bernard 2010 The Sense of the Past: Essays on the History of Philosophy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar