monists define the good as centring in happiness. To act aright is to act in such a way as will promote either our own happiness or the happiness of those around us, or the happiness of the world at large. Whatever conduct has this effect is right conduct; whatever conduct has a contrary effect is wrong conduct. In answer, then, to the question, Why must I do what is right? the utilitarian answer is, Because by so doing you will contribute something to the wellbeing of the world. It is your duty to act in a particular way, in the way which we call right, because by acting in this way you will promote the happiness of yourself and others, and will thus attain the end which all human beings are born to strive after. Here, also, we have a categorical answer to the question, What is the summum bonum, the chief end of man? The utilitarians declare that happiness is the good.
27. This theory of the good which makes it convertible with happiness seems to labour under a defect precisely the opposite of that which we charged against the anti-utilitarian scheme. There we were disposed to accept the conclusion, but to find fault with the premises as insufficient or null. Here we are indisposed to embrace the conclusion, although the premises seem reasonable and strong. That a particular action should redound to the advantage of myself or others seems a very sufficient reason why it should be performed. The advantage expected to arise from it seems to make the performance of it a
