essay

Answer both of the following sets of questions:

Question Set 1: To argue that happiness is the only thing people want for its own sake, Mill argues that having money is part of a miser’s happiness and displaying virtue is part of a monk’s.  Is Mill right about this?  Is this compatible with his claim that happiness is pleasure?  Is happiness just the satisfaction of your desires (or your getting what you want) even when your getting what you want doesn’t bring you pleasure?  Can someone think she is happy when she really isn’t? How is happiness best understood for the purposes of defining and defending a utilitarian ethics?

Question Set 2: The first formulation of the categorical imperative provides us with a way to test principles (or maxims) to see whether it would be moral to act on those principles.  Critics have complained that the test is both too weak (it lets in bad principles) and too strong (it keeps out perfectly fine principles).  Explain these criticisms using examples.  How might Kant respond to these criticisms? Can he effectively respond to these criticisms without abandoning his goal of establishing a purely "formal" first principle of morality?

Each answer should be 1-3 pages long.