Is there really this preponderance among mankind? Did the polytheists of the ancient times not think the same? The monarchs who claimed divine right, the autocratic oppressors, the leaders of coup d'etaits. In their mind, each of these people thought that what they were doing was right. I may still agree with Mill, but it might be presumptuous.

This makes me think that utility is not solely theoretical, but that there is an element of practicality involved here. Undoubtedly, people seek to be happy. Rarely do they find a level of happiness they are comfortable with, but they do achieve a level where can avoid things that would prevent them from being unhappy.

In theme with what was written about Bentham earlier, this appears to be some sort of proof that utilitarianism hardlly thinks of the individual. Mill is basically saying that whether or not you feel as if there are two levels of pleasure, there most absolutely are.

I have to disagree. I'm not sure, but Bentham could be looking at this from two ways. 1) That a person can judge herself and whether her actions are grounds for punishment. 2) A person knows what brings them pleasure and displeasure. The first is blatantly disputable; regardless of whether an action may not be grounds for punishment, there is a reason we have courts of law to determine these things. The second is a valid point of discussion, and I would argue that people's views can become distorted to a point that they don't actually know what brings them pleasure.