Blog 3

In Mills book, Utilitarianism, he states that “ there ought either to be some one fundamental principle or law, at the root of all morality, or if there be several, there should be a determinate order of precedence among them:” (Mills pg. 7) I object to the position and will show via the example of starvation and a starving population that the fundamental principle that no one should starve is not achieved. With a starving population typically very young people starve and also elderly people starve. Usually middle age people to young adults do not starve.  If Mills principle applied the available food would spread out over the entire population and not just received by the young adult to middle age group. Mills position is that no one should starve, yet why is it that the very young or old starve, in a starving population. It seems as if determinant order of precedent among them, so I want to know if that decision consciously made to share the food or is there a made up rule that is put into play? It is not moral that children and old people starve and people in the middle age are the ones who do not starve first.