Ethics

Introduction
Mill seems to draw his conclusions based on logical considerations. On this basis, the scholar argues that the only evidence depicting the presence of a thing rests on the ability to see it. In light of this, the argument presented indicates that the only evidence for desire is to be able to prove it. It is assumed that pleasure is desirable since people desire it. This is a clear presentation of a position that runs counter to morality.

Happiness is very diverse and cannot be easily quantified. It has got a variety of ingredients that differ among individuals. However, the various sub sets of happiness are desirable and can be separately considered as drivers of human pursuit as opposed to aggregates.

Money is associated with many pleasures (Mill, 1867). If it is true that pleasure is in most cases derived from money, then the pursuit of pleasures should be seen in the same line with the pursuit of money. Any virtue that guarantees happiness must underlie pleasure. In a sense, mill has divorced reason from desire.  In a nut shell, desire is autonomous from powerwill.

However there are contentions regarding what is pursued, for instance, it is not always the case that what is pursued is that that is always pleasant. Mill has conceded that what is pursued is not always pleasant. But mill insists that the will is an offshoot of desire that develops due to habitual associations. Mill gives a logical explanation of events though there is lack of support in reference to raising factual information. The scholar only points to the issue of association (Mill, 1867).

As often remarked, questions concerning ultimate ends do not correspond to proof. It is common to lack proof in all first principle. This also applies to first premises of personal knowledge and those regarding conduct. Questions concerning ends are equally related to ends.

According to the utilitarian school, happiness is desirable (Mill, 1867). The paradigm further claims that ends and means to those ends are desirable. In line with the claim that if an issue being examined must be visible, then the ends and means being raised at this point must also be seen. It is difficult to see ends and their means though this must be looked into in different and three dimensional perspectives in nature.

Towards the above stated claim, if desire exists, then it must be manifested in peoples pursuits. In theory and practice, the utilitarian theory views desire to be present because in its absence, it could not be acknowledged to be there. The acknowledgment of it being there seems to be the major supporting evidence.

General happiness is presumed to be desirable on the pretext that each individual it is achievable and desires own attainment. Happiness is basically the end pursuit of human conduct. The belief that people do not desire anything else apart from this is a clear indicator in support of the idea (Mill, 1867).

There is a contestation on the above point as individuals appear to chase things other than those premised on pursuit of happiness. To cite an example, the adherence to virtue, and the avoidance of vice related activities may be inconsistent with the claim that individuals pursue happiness.

The opponents of the utilitarian school thus have a ground to pour scorn on the school.  From above, it is proven that there are other things that individuals pursue apart from happiness. The revelation that virtues are part of human pursuit paints a grim picture on the utilitarian school. The obedience shown to virtue does not present a pursuit which is not necessary an end nor is it a means to an end in it self.  
Happiness is not an abstraction as it is a concrete whole. The utilitarian idea supports this view as it purports that life would be so poor if the primitive desires were absent. These primitive desires form both temporary and permanent pursuits in life (Mill, 1867).

In the thinking of Mill, it is an injustice to deny someone something due to them it is also held that everybody should be treated fairly. In a nutshell, justice is viewed in relation to equality before the law (Mill, 1867).

Morality and justice are differentiated by the distinction seen in relation to appealing to what is perfect against what is imperfect. Duties that fall in the imperfection sphere constitute moral aspects. On the other hand, perfect issues are tied to justice. Issues of justice derive from expediency. Justice is all about self defense and sympathetic aspects.  Utility or happiness is premised on right or wrong. Right or wrong are themselves aspects of justice.

There is an element of law when talking about justice. On the same issue, an examination of deprivation and violation is necessary towards the understanding of the discourse. Laws can thus be good or bad. They are good if they are believed to be just and bad if thought to be unjust.

If utility is the ultimate goal, then bad laws may curtail its achievement, however if the laws are jus then they foster the attainment of satisfaction. however, contestation on the issue do not end there as a law perceived to be just can impose on one an evil while  extending a good to another. The stand-off means that laws are not the ultimate justice criterion.

If a law withholds from an individual what is due to them, then such law is bad. However, it should be noted that individuals deserve what is right if their actions are right. In the same breath, it is held that an individual should be accorded evil if their actions are evil in nature.

Impartiality has been presented also as an instrument of justice. Impartiality implies that every individual should be treated in the same way as anybody else. Simply put, every case is supposed to be offered the same hearing and conclusion.

The notion of equality is very controversial as its presuppositions cannot be attained in a real world setting. However, the notion is closely tied with that of utility. It is perceived that justice is meant to achieve justice in society. Society is pervaded by different ranks of individuals and so is the utility sphere. It is illogical to presuppose that a rich fellow will attain similar satisfaction to a poor one in consuming a certain attribute. This is indicated by the world justice systems in which cases the rich and wealth seem preferred and given totally a different set of treatment.

The justice system however unjust as it may be, the intentions for its creation was to lead to a fair and just world. It doesnt matter what it has been achieved or not. However, it is logical to argue that the justice system is of great value to society as it helps offer mitigation in various cases. The system may have failed to meet the equality agenda but it has helped dispense justice on a wide scale.

Conclusion
Utility is a relative term that each individual perceive in different terms. Justice is also viewed in the same way. The application of rules is supposed to be fair but it often leaves people fuming wondering how rulings are made. If the application of the law was fair, then a panel of jurists could arrive at the same conclusion. The fact that jurists differ raises serious questions concerning justices.