Book · 1861
Utilitarianism
by John Stuart Mill
Mill's 1863 defence of utilitarianism in under 60 pages — the text r/askphilosophy recommends you finish in a week, not a month.
What does Reddit think of Utilitarianism?
All 4 Reddit mentions come from r/askphilosophy, across 2021, 2023, and a pair in 2025. The book turns up in curriculum-building threads, not debates about its ideas, which tells you something. The ↑19 comment making the rounds flatly says a month for Mill's Utilitarianism is too long; it's a short text, not a semester commitment. A separate ↑42 comment steers readers to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy first for summative context before cracking original works at all. The book lands consistently in reading lists alongside Aristotle and Spinoza — company that signals canonical status, not active enthusiasm. Four unique commenters in 7 years is thin. This is a text people slot into syllabi without much commentary, because there isn't much to say: it does what it says, briefly, and the conversation has moved elsewhere.
Community feedback & reader fit
Themes
- · consequentialism and the greatest-happiness principle
- · quality versus quantity of pleasure
- · justice and rights within utilitarian ethics
- · philosophical brevity and canonical status
- · curriculum-building and historical survey
Common praise
- + Finishes in a single sitting — r/askphilosophy pegs a week as generous, not tight.
- + Sits comfortably alongside Aristotle and Spinoza on historical philosophy reading lists.
- + The Hackett edition keeps editorial apparatus minimal enough that the primary text stays primary.
Common criticism
- − Four mentions across 7 years in r/askphilosophy means the Reddit conversation has essentially passed it by.
- − The ↑42 comment recommends the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy over original texts as a first stop — Mill included.
- − No commenter actually argues about the ideas, which suggests the book functions as box-ticking rather than live intellectual material.
Who it's for
You're building a philosophy reading list from scratch and need the utilitarian primary source checked off. If you're expecting a text that generates debate on r/askphilosophy, the data says otherwise — 4 mentions, no contested threads, sentiment not even scoreable. The people recommending it are syllabi-builders, not evangelists. Pair it with the Stanford Encyclopedia entry on Mill if you want the contemporary critical context the text itself can't provide.
Mentions over time
Top subreddits
Which Reddit comments matter for Utilitarianism?
Top-upvoted quotes across the subreddits where this book is mentioned. Click through to read the full thread.
“STANFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY!!! Every. Single. Time! It can give a summative and less technically worded explanation with both original and contemporary interpretations of philosophy. As for original works of philosophy, I saw that Aristotle was mentioned and that you are already reading P…
“Probably skip the crash course videos. The readings are all fine, but it might be useful to tailor the plan based on your interests, which will probably change as you go along. Additionally, the timing is pretty unhelpful. Like a month for Mill's Utilitarianism? Probably don't need that. A month fo…
“Honestly, the Republic would be very very low on my list of historical texts that speak to current events. I say this as a person whose main field of study is ancient philosophy and a person who teaches the Republic every year...it's an interesting text and an important one, but I don't think the po…
“Spinoza's ethics, and Mill's utilitarianism (but perhaps a few others by Mill?). He also read a large amount of Schopenhauer––his main work, and both parerga and paralipomena (given the latter was actually what propelled Schopenhauer to fame in the first place.)
Convinced? Pick up Utilitarianism
What else does r/askphilosophy read?
Other books mentioned in the same sub, ranked. Shared-sub overlap with this title breaks ties.
Critique of Pure Reason
Immanuel Kant
Kant's 1781 attempt to settle the limits of human knowledge — the book that split philosophy in two and still hasn't been fully digested.
The Myth of Sisyphus
Albert Camus
A 1942 essay that opens with the question of whether life is worth living and ends by insisting Sisyphus is happy.
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Ludwig Wittgenstein
Wittgenstein built a numbered ladder from logical atomism to the inexpressible, then said the ladder had to be discarded once you climbed it.
Being and Time
Martin Heidegger
Heidegger's argument that human existence only gets its meaning from death — 162 Reddit mentions, mostly from people explaining why it's so hard to read.
Nicomachean Ethics
Aristotle
Aristotle's 2,400-year-old argument that living well depends on virtue, leisure, and the company you keep — still the canonical text for the field.
Beyond Good and Evil
Friedrich Nietzsche
Nietzsche dismantles the moral framework Western civilization built on, then refuses to tell you what to replace it with.
Utilitarianism — frequently asked
Is Mill's Utilitarianism worth reading if I've already read summaries?+
Depends on your goal. The ↑42 r/askphilosophy comment suggests going to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy first for context. The ↑19 comment implies the text is short enough that reading it directly costs almost nothing — probably a week at a casual pace, not the month some curricula allocate. If you've read good summaries, the marginal gain is just the original prose.
How much does Reddit actually discuss Mill's Utilitarianism?+
Barely. It appears in reading-list threads alongside Aristotle and Spinoza, but nobody is arguing about its claims. This is a text the sub recommends without discussing.
Should I read Mill's Utilitarianism or the Stanford Encyclopedia entry on Mill first?+
r/askphilosophy leans SEP-first. The ↑42 comment in the data explicitly recommends the Stanford Encyclopedia for summative and less technically-worded explanations before original works. That said, Mill's Utilitarianism is short — under 60 pages — so the sequencing cost is low either way.
What kind of philosophy reader is Mill's Utilitarianism meant for?+
The r/askphilosophy evidence points to survey readers and students building historical breadth. It appears in lists alongside Aristotle, Spinoza, and Schopenhauer — canonical coverage, not a book people press on each other because it changed how they think. If you want utilitarian philosophy that Reddit actively argues about, this isn't where that conversation lives.