Dissatisfied Socrates v. Satisfied Fool

       While reading Utilitarianism, I was able to make a connection to my educational psychology class reading about the motivation of students in schools and the level of happiness experienced by humans with “higher faculties.” Using the findings from the book we are currently reading, Drive by Daniel Pink, I would support the claim made by Mill that it is “better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.” I think this is a strong claim to make, and while I agree with the conclusion, I do not believe Mill does enough to silence criticism of it. I believe proponents of the argument that being satisfied by more base pleasure is better than experiencing the happier pleasures of higher faculty happiness would ask for more from Mill, considering the pain that can often be experienced with that higher form of happiness.

            At this point, Mill would have benefited from Pink’s book. Looking at the current psychology of how people are motivated, Pink believes businesses and schools are motivating employees and students ineffectively. The extrinsic motivation used by employers and teachers is not the most efficient form of motivation and is not consistent with human nature. Instead, Pink and leading psychologists argue humans are best motivated by intrinsic factors. We want to do things independently, we want to do things to gain mastery, and we want to things that have a purpose we understand, which are all different than the current motivational structure of doing things for rewards.

            I think this relates to Mill because it shows that humans are most motivated, and find the most happiness in doing things for their intrinsic value, not for something as base as a simple reward or punishment.