1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

would not have been Mill as we know him today, and his work (if he still chose to philosophize)

would reflect a different style of rumination and valuing--had he been an SJ7, Mill would have

most likely valued religion and other traditions as the sole source of morality as well as (in the case

of religion) its being sanctioned by omnipotent powers (as reason and coherence aren't as valued).

If we are to determine the number of individuals that Mill would consider suitable as moral

judges and individuals, we need only apply the same formula we used when discussing Kant. By

looking at the sixteen types, we determine that only a select group of them will have the personality

that is required to fit Mill's morally judges. We can also determine that a well rounded IQ of > 140

is most likely needed for those with the most corresponding personality types to be fully intelligent

and capable of moral judging and action. When we also subtract out those environmental

influences that prohibit the mental cultivation of the individual (e.g. "The present wretched

education and wretched social arrangements. . ." [Mill 1979, pg. 13]) we come to the same

number of eligible individuals as found in our formulation for Kant's "rational beings" ~60,000.

What we can infer, logically, from this is that the personality of Mill and Kant are similar, even

though their specific philosophies may differ. As both Kant and Mill are both NTs (and more

specifically ~INTPs), it is understandable that in their philosophies, they both highly value the

same specific personality and intelligence as they are only reflecting their perspective in their

philosophy--who they are.

V. Critique of Utilitarianism on the Grounds of Personality

Mill has argued that happiness is an objective end, i.e. everyone wants to be happy. This

may very well be so, but, I would like to contest that this is not a valid or practical grounding for

the morality called Utilitarianism. The problem that I have noticed is tied into perspective, Mill

assumes that what makes one happy should, and could, make everyone happy, but with any

knowledge of the psychology of personality we know this to be incorrect. Mill, by including his

IMAGE imgs/MBTIŠKantandMill05.gif