Similarities Between Mill And Nietzsche
Mill and Nietzsche have different ideas on how people act towards their actions. Mill focuses on the end purpose of human behaviors to create happiness for a group of people rather than an individual happiness. He defines Utilitarianism as human’s actions that lead to happiness. Human’s desires either give pleasure or prevent pain to create happiness (Arthur & Scalet, 2009, p. 66). For Mill, the consequences of an action matter. As discussed in class, we could measure the quantity and quality of pain and pleasure for our actions by using the math. For instance, a man who cheated on his wife decided to lie to her and hide the truth. What is the reason for the man to hide the truth from his wife? Does he see lying as a wrong ethical behavior?
…show more content…
He believes that there are no facts, and there is no true or false. He defines subjectivism as individual opinions, perceptions, and points of view, while relativism is defined as opinions that are based on shared experiences of culture and socioeconomic class. For Nietzsche, God says that all people should be treated equally. Nietzsche says “…individuals deal with each other as equals—and that happens in every healthy aristocracy—must itself,” (Nietzsche, p. 5). As discussed in class, someone should or should not pull the lever for a train running on a railroad track that is split into two sides. If we assume that there are groups of aristocratic people on one side and poor people on the other side, should the person pull the lever to save the poor people? How do we treat these people equally? If the person does not pull the lever to save the aristocratic people rather than the poor people, he treats them based on his subjective rational ideas and the way he has been grown up not based on their humanity. According to Nietzsche “He makes the judgment “What is harmful to me is harmful in itself.” He understands himself as something which in general first confers honour on things, as something which creates values” (Nietzsche, p. 8). Unlike Mill, if we say that a utilitarian would pull the lever to save the poor people; because they would benefit the society such as working in farms and construction sites. So, a person’s judgment through Mill’s argument should be based on rational
He believes that there are no facts, and there is no true or false. He defines subjectivism as individual opinions, perceptions, and points of view, while relativism is defined as opinions that are based on shared experiences of culture and socioeconomic class. For Nietzsche, God says that all people should be treated equally. Nietzsche says “…individuals deal with each other as equals—and that happens in every healthy aristocracy—must itself,” (Nietzsche, p. 5). As discussed in class, someone should or should not pull the lever for a train running on a railroad track that is split into two sides. If we assume that there are groups of aristocratic people on one side and poor people on the other side, should the person pull the lever to save the poor people? How do we treat these people equally? If the person does not pull the lever to save the aristocratic people rather than the poor people, he treats them based on his subjective rational ideas and the way he has been grown up not based on their humanity. According to Nietzsche “He makes the judgment “What is harmful to me is harmful in itself.” He understands himself as something which in general first confers honour on things, as something which creates values” (Nietzsche, p. 8). Unlike Mill, if we say that a utilitarian would pull the lever to save the poor people; because they would benefit the society such as working in farms and construction sites. So, a person’s judgment through Mill’s argument should be based on rational