I believe the theory of Objective List is the most defensible among the three Utilitarian theories. The premis is simply put around achieving things that increase well being like, knowledge, beauty, relationships and freedom. These are all very necessary things to the human state. Knowledge helps with knowing how to live one's life and function within a society of other humans. Relationships allow people to build bonds with one another to help live which is vital as humans social creatures. Beauty can be taken in many different aspects but to focus on what one can change about his or her own physique is never self harming, such as exercise and proper diet which aid a person in living a better life. All of these objectives lead to a greater sense of happiness and with more happiness there is a yearning to go farther and achieve more. The objection so far could be that this is paternalistic in that we have a set list that we have to appeal to. Although this may seem domineering the list inst far from the truth and many aspects can be changed to fit people within different circumstances, there is no insane specificity that would require someone to stop farming and practice Mozart. A second response would be that it seems judgmental to require everyone to better themselves on a predetermined scale and to consider those that cannot have access to certain aspects of these things. As a rejoinder I would have to say that logically if one is not in the position to increase these aspects, it is better to improve one rather than none at all. As long as something is improving the yearning for advancement and achievement continues and the rest will follow.