What Are Two Proofs For Mill's Norm Of Morality

Two proofs for mill’s ultimate norm of morality
Mill’s makes many statements that imply that he is committed to utilitarianism in that actions that are correct in proportion as they usually try to promote happiness, and they are wrong as they tend to promote or produce the reverse of happiness. Statements of such kind ought to be well understood as simplifying gadgets for the purposes of initial exposition. What is good is what we ought to aim at in our normal actions and lives. He argues that that happiness of an individual is equally desirable and other individuals can find it to be problematic. He puts a claim that the happiness if each individual is good to that individual and generally a good to all other people. By the show that happiness is highly desired nothing other than happiness is also desirable. Happiness that is equal in amounts and also desired equally. Whether they are felt by different individuals or same individuals.
Mill also believes that we normally violate our obligations as humans. He also believes that we are not obliged to do all we can upon pain of moral censure. He says we should not be bound by the opinion of other people to do
The consequences of mill’s subordination can be felt. These can be, First, someone my harm others by violating their rights and freedom and also interfering with their action. For example if the person is unable to have a control over his spending, or not able to pay her debts or not able to support the children, then they can be condemned or punished. But it may be good to punish them for not supporting their children or unable to clear the debts but it is not good to punish them for not controlling their budget. On the other hand it may lead to exploitation of individual rights as seen in ancient Romans used slaves as workers. Also ruthlessness may also be seen for example Truman who was a president, ordered atomic bombs to be dropped in Nagasaki and