One of the points that John Stuart Mill responds to in his defense of utilitarian ethics was that the utilitarianism advocates merely a bestial life of pleasure. Mill argues that by "happiness" he means pleasure both intellectual and sensual. However, we have a sense of dignity which has us prefer intellectual pleasures over sensual ones. He continues that the principle of utility involves an assessment of only an action's consequences, and not the motives or character traits of the agent performing the action. In this regard, he rejects classical virtue theory. He states, " happiness considered as the directive rule of human conduct. But it is by no means an indispensable condition to the acceptance of the utilitarian standard; for that standard is to the agent's own greatest happiness, but the greatest amount of happiness overall (348)." We look to perform the greatest good, not our own good. .
He tries to connect pleasure or happiness with being the object of a desire and being good in itself. Mill makes many distinctions and conveys his own preferences regarding what is desirable and good; some desires are primitive, others the result of experience and self-discipline. He points to the qualitative differences between kinds of pleasure and says that we ought to give preference to the higher pleasures, which include the social and generous pleasures and those of the cultivated feelings and intellect. Regarding actions he states that some will bring happiness in the long run and others will not, and we ought to choose the action which looks most likely to produce the most happiness for all concerned in the action. One should be guided by the general rules which have been formulated as a result of the long experience of men in society.
Mill argues that the principle of utility should be seen as a tool for generating secondary moral principles, such as "don't steal," which promote general happiness.