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

own perspective in his philosophy creates for himself a conflict of quality and quantity of

happiness due to the variations and proportion of personality types.

As we have discussed before, Mill is an INTP and this leads him to have a very different

way to think about and interpret the world; different than any other of the 16 types. Thus, while an

INTP may be made happy by the "cultivation of the mind," an INFP will be made happy by self-

actualization, and an ESFP will be made happy through more hedonistic actions. What we find in a

study of personality type is that not only are world views different between types, but fundamental

motivations and, most important to our discussion, what makes different types happy is a cosmos

apart. The mere fact that different types are made happy by different conduct is harmful to

Utilitarianism. Though Utilitarianism may be correct to believe that happiness is a universal desire,

what we find is that a certain and consistent percentage of the population can only be made happy

by different means. Thus, while happiness may be an objective desire, it's grounds are not--they

are subjective.

To begin to understand how knowledge of personality is harmful to Mill's Utilitarianism

we need to observe the percentage of the population composed of distinct temperamenttypes

compose. It has been found that SJs make up 38% of the population, SPs 38%, NFs 12%, and

NTs 12% of the worlds population (the differentpersonalitytypes each compose a smaller part of

the population, e.g. INTPs = ~1%). Thus, what will make 38% of the population happy will not

necessarily make the remaining 62% happy and may, in fact, make them unhappy. This is the

conflict--Mill assumes that all individuals will be made happy by cultivation of the mind or

"pleasures of the mind" but any MBTI research will show that 64% of the population (SJs & SPs)

disagree. For the INTPs (~1%) this may be true, and this may be generally agreed on by both the

NFs and NTs (24%). This percentage being correct, how does Mill intend to balance quantity and

quality of happiness? Should we satisfy only the SPs and SJs, for they make up most of the

population, or should we satisfy the happiness of the NFs and NTs since Mill would tend to favor

what brings them happiness? We can not do a cost/benefit analysis of quality and quantity, for

even though one temperament may compose a larger percentage of the population than another, we

can never judge quality, for these variations in percentage of type occur for an evolutionary

purpose and are entirely natural. To favor the happiness of one group and neglect the conflicting

happiness of another group in favor of quantity of happiness (since quality is relative to each type)