CAUTION: Please edit this question's title, which I probably miswrote as I do not understand the quote below.
Source: pp 49-50, Philosophy ; A Very Short Introduction (2002) by Edward Craig.

  So how comfortably does the ideal of integrity fit with Mill’s utilitarianism? Not very comfortably at all, some think.

[1.] For however sincere your commitment to some principle in the past, THAT FACT by itself does not give you – if we take Mill’s position seriously and literally – any reason to follow it again now.

[2.] If in the past your commitment to that principle has consistently led to good effects (measured in terms of happiness), then THAT FACT gives you at least some reason to think that it will do so again – which IS a reason to follow it now.

[3.] But your commitment to it, however sincere, however much it has become a part of your personality, is not.

Critics of Utilitarianism question whether we can really live with that way of thinking.

Please contrast and explain more clearly 1 vs 2? I do not see the difference.


Simple really. The fact that you followed a principle in the past is not a reason to follow it again. The fact that you followed a principle in the past and it gave good results, that is a reason to follow it again.

"We always did it this way". "Sure, we always did, and it never worked". Would you follow a principle that you used in the past and that never led to success?

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.