Utilitarianism, too, has been misunderstood, which sets the stage for his extended elaboration of the main aspects of the theory.
The moral structure of totality in Utilitarianism is identified as the fact that "pleasure, and freedom from pain, are the only things desirable as ends." That formulation entails a hierarchy of values, which comes down to an explanation of subsidiary values and concepts in terms of the whole and positions them vis-a-vis the whole. This explains, for example, Mill's view that "some kinds of pleasure are more desirable and more valuable than others." But the point is that whatever does not inhere in the ends of Utilitarianism appears to be considered either subsidiary to the whole or hostile to it in whole or in part.
The totalizing principle of Utility as Mill describes it comes down to moral structures and behavior that inhere in the greatest good for the greatest number; this is reinforced by Mill's equating Utilitarianism with the Greatest Happiness Principle. Such an equation implies that Mill's moral philosophy is profoundly social, i.e., that the moral content of individual actions, attitudes, and behavior, which is to be judged according as it is consistent with the ends of Utility, overlaps with and perforce spreads across society as a whole. Indeed, the practical application of Utilitarianism must be in society. On the other hand, the conceptualization of and responsibility for Utilitarianism resides in the individual, more exactly the individual's association with principles of morality that will coincide in the greatest happiness and pleasure spread across the greatest number.
Mill's strategy in looking at how the greatest social pleasure is achieved is to look at how the individual arrives at a perception of such pleasure. He assigns different values or categories to different pleasures, citing "difference of quality in pleasures" based on the choice between two available pleasures of ...