John Stuart Mill: Internal and External Sanctions of Utilitarianism

John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism: Chapter III Summary

The Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility

To those who question the binding force of the Principle of Utility (or the Principle of General Happiness) as a determinant of our actions, Mill responds that whenever we adopt an ethical criterion, we inevitably ask: Why must I act in a certain way?

The answer lies in the forces that condition our actions, which are categorized as either external or internal. (Mill notes that only with deeply ingrained moral education and public opinion would the foundations of morality not be jeopardized.)

The Obligation to Promote General Happiness

In the case of Utilitarianism, we wonder: Why am I obligated to promote the general happiness? Mill argues that the reasons are no different than for any other moral system. The obligation stems from sanctions:

• External Sanctions: The hope of gaining favor and avoiding rejection from our fellow men or God.
• Internal Sanctions: The hope of gaining pleasure and avoiding the pain that arises from following or violating the dictates of our conscience.

Conscience as the Foundation of Morality

The internal sanction—conscience—is a feeling present in our spirit and is the true foundation of all morality, excluding external pressures. This internal binding force is what compels individuals. If this force were absent in an individual, they would feel no obligation to follow any standard of conduct, except through external sanctions.

However, experience demonstrates that universal feelings exist, and their binding nature is evident in properly educated individuals.

Innate vs. Acquired Moral Sentiments

It is often argued that a moral criterion would possess greater authority if it emanated from a transcendent being. Yet, even in this case, the ultimate penalty is rooted in the spirit itself, and those who question why they must obey their conscience often do so only when considering external sanctions.

Those who believe (the intuitionists) that moral principles are innate cannot deny that among other moral obligations is the consideration of the pleasures and pains of others. Mill argues, however, that moral sentiments are acquired, not innate (if they were innate, they would be perceptibly found in all of us). Nevertheless, they are no less natural.

Moral power—whether through external sanctions or the education of children—can be formed using various methods. However, Mill warns that moral sentiments that deviate significantly from basic natural feelings will fade away as intellectual cultivation advances through analysis.

The Social Basis of Utilitarian Morality

The deep-rooted concept that every individual has of themselves as a social being means that one of their natural desires is the harmony between their feelings and objectives and those of their peers. This sense of partnership will strengthen continuously, even if it is not explicitly instilled by education.

Mill suggests that humanity is still in a relatively primitive stage of development. Currently, only a minority of people possess a fully developed social sense, viewing their peers not as rivals in the pursuit of happiness, but as partners.

The feeling of unity will be enhanced with the continuous improvement of the human spirit, reaching a point where individuals will think or desire nothing for themselves that does not include the benefits of others.