A concepção de liberdade civil utilitarista em John Stuart Mill e suas contribuições

Abstract

Life requires decisions to people all the time and people take them according to their values, considering the particularities of each situation. Values are any aspects of the decision which are considered desirable, undesirable, relevant and important, as being preferred, desirable, pleasant, promising, safe, exciting, fair, good, correct, easy, uncertain, etc. Based on these values, we understand that the ultimate foundation of utilitarianism is the principle of utility. According to this concept, an action is considered correct, thus, valid, if it promotes greater happiness of those involved. Happiness, in turn, is understood as the achievement of pleasure and welfare. In this current we find a eudemonistic and hedonistic perspective, as it has as the ultimate goal happiness consisting in pleasure. Any utilitarian has to care mostly with the promotion of general happiness. From Mill, morality becomes the achievement of every human being in this world, here and now. The principle of utility requires that each one of us do whatever is necessary, and within our rich, to promote happiness and avoid pain. By analyzing the predictable consequences of an action, we must consider not only the quantity, but the quality of pleasure resulting from them. To utilitarians what really matters are the consequences of actions, as they should aim pleasure. Only this allows us to assess whether an action is right or not, leading to the idea of a consequentialist perspective. What matters are the consequences and not the reasons of our actions, as long as it promotes happiness to as many people as possible. However, the act is permissible only if, and only if, it impartially maximizes the good. The Utilitarian philosophy usually divides its readers. It is extolled by some, who defend the merit of its being a viewpoint that offers better benefits, so that important ethical issues the ones associated with conditions that can make life happier and free from suffering can be more easily dealt with. On the other hand, there are those that points to the danger of a philosophy that estimates the moral quality of actions, taking into account only its consequences. This current is not a philosophical school, since it is a philosophy that constantly reinvents itself and adapts, so that it can always meet new challenges that ethics cannot avoid facing.