Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Mill's higher pleasures doctrine ranks qualities of experience, not types of goods, leaving the structure of rights grounded in equal human dignity.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Mill's claim that intellectual pleasures are 'higher' presupposes a quality ranking that seems to privilege certain experiences over others arbitrarily.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If rights derive from equal dignity alone, the higher pleasures doctrine becomes superfluous and potentially contradicts equal consideration of interests.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Mill's own examples suggest he privileges certain types of goods (education, culture) that benefit from higher pleasure ranking, undermining neutrality.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Mill explicitly distinguishes intellectual pleasures from bodily ones, focusing on quality of mental engagement rather than goods consumed.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Equal dignity requires that all humans deserve respect for their rational capacities, independent of which pleasures they empirically prefer.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Higher pleasures doctrine avoids paternalism about lifestyle choices while maintaining objective standards for human flourishing.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.