Utilitarianism is defined because the right way to act is the one that maximizes your happiness (pleasure and happiness are the absence of pain), while the wrong way is that which produces the opposite, that is to say pain. Unhappiness is defined here as pain or the opposite of happiness. This is the basis of utilitarianism or what Mill calls the “Greatest Happiness Principle” and is the best ethical theory that humans should follow. The argument for the above is this (1) Humans need a way to evaluate whether their actions are right or wrong (2) Good and evil are defined as that which promotes happiness (pleasure) or pain (unhappiness) _________________________________________________________________________________________ (3) Therefore, we judge our actions whether they are moral or immoral by the amount of happiness they create (a good action) or wrong if they create pain and suffering ( misfortune) -----UtilitarianismI would like the reader to understand that need to evaluate our action is not necessarily a conscious and deliberate action that we undertake, but rather a philosophical questioning when we discuss ethics and what ethical theory is the best. Also, above I used the word pleasure, but here pleasure does not refer strictly to our bodily sensation but rather to our satisfaction and well-being, like what Mill discussed "intellectual pleasures" . This is not to say that the pleasure here is not hedonistic in nature in the sense in which the word is used, but rather an extension of the term. Finally, to clarify for the reader the opposite of happiness is not sadness; it is actually unhappiness or pain. Additionally, the words ethics and moral are used interchangeably. The argument presented above can be extended as follows (1) There is no ...... middle of paper ...... those involved are always different. This explains the above paradox of two people committing the same action and one being judged moral, the other immoral. The question of precedence is, however, irrelevant because there is a standard of agreed actions throughout history that are unethical, for example killing children. What we are talking about here are everyday decisions and actions that we have to make and not an objective morality that is probably accepted by all ethical theories (this is speculative). To answer the second part of the objection, the reader must understand that in everyday situations where a decision must be made, we almost unconsciously evaluate what the ramifications of our actions are, it is part of our nature to seek things that , as Mill calls it "desirable as an end” .