The main argument Mill is making that we should strive to attain the “Greatest Happiness Principle,” meaning we should act in a way that will create the most happiness. This does not necessarily mean that what makes us happy is necessarily the best course to take. While I believe that this method ideal, I don’t think it is necessarily plausible. I think it is extremely difficult to make people happy without making people unhappy. Finding the point at which more people are happy than those that are unhappy is a task that is very difficult. Regardless of this, people have a natural tendency to act in a manner that benefits him or herself. This leads into the next point of Mill’s article.

Mill also writes about “higher and lower pleasures” and states that human beings have a natural inclination towards what is intrinsically better even if the higher pleasure is accompanied by discontent later down the road. I find this hard to grasp as well. What if an action that you believe is a higher pleasure, for example drinking or doing drugs, you become addicted to? According to Mill, this is still the better option because you believe it to be better. However, it violates the greatest happiness principle. When someone becomes addicted to drugs, it doesn’t only affect them. It affects family members and friends as well. While this may be making you happy, it causes more unhappiness to those around you. I don’t think the two principles can always coincide with one another because what may make you happy may not make others happy.