Philosophy

    It is a good thing that John Stuart Mill s name was mentioned early on, or else the reader would be lost on what the paper is about. With no title to hint the topic, and considering the crooked train of thoughts worsened by the massive typographical and punctuation errors, the paper requires much help from an editorproofreader. But, in the absence of these surface errors, the commentary sets the reader for a deep, mind-blowing cerebral activity pre-imposing clear disposition, virtue of patience to learn and relearn philosophical views, and sufficient orientation on history, economics, politics, etc.

    Banking primarily on English Philosopher Mill s views and writings on utilitarianism, the paper overflows with erudite substance only an informed or learned individual has a right to react or contradict. Academic phrases mentioned such as utilitarianism, Benthamite tenets, calculus of felicity, one vote-one person, even the coinage  beachchemistry-type decisions , are overwhelmingly taxing, suggesting the reader to go to his library for a thorough reading, comprehension and analysis.

    Something about Mill s person. Suffering nervous breakdown at 21 due to intensive learning and reading of Greek, Latin, Math, History to Philosophy and so on and so forth from age three is quite sadistic. Thanks to that self-sacrifice, it resulted to writings like On Liberty and advocacy on women issues, making him one of the first feminists that endeared him to the female gender. 

    What ultimately struck me is his views on happiness and pleasure. Unlike Jeremy Bentham s placing no distinction on happiness so long as it pleases the man, Mill s view categorizes happiness and pleasure in qualitative and quantitative terms that pleasures of worth to more people should be supported, unlike pleasures that please only a few.