代写书稿：什么是功利主义
密尔的比例主义学说阐明了功利主义的观点，即必须界定促进幸福的权利行为或义务。然而，密尔对责任与幸福之间的关系仍缺乏明确的认识。为了理解功利主义概念的不同分支，有必要区分间接功利主义和直接功利主义。根据直接功利主义，任何与道德评估相关的对象都需要通过评估总体幸福感的关键结果来按比例进行评估(Mill 121)。在间接功利主义下，对道德的评估一般不会根据良好或最优的接受价值来评价幸福的结果。因此，在公式化下，间接功利主义和直接功利主义是道德评价客观化的一般理论。但关键的焦点是职责或正确的行动。
功利主义行为是对直接功利主义最熟悉的一种形式，而责任理论则是对间接功利主义最常见的一种形式。威廉姆斯提出的另一种观点是间接享乐主义。威廉曾说过，不可能通过直接劝说的方式获得幸福，这种方式可以指的是快乐。在乔治的例子中，功利主义认为乔治将把自我放纵的神经质放在一边。他可以接受CBW生产的工作，因为积极的影响大于消极的影响，这就是George (Mill 210)的不适。另一方面，本我倾向于认为乔治为自己的正直增加了砝码。这是因为关键的项目将定义他在代理的道德而反对CBW。这不会是拿这份工作为CBW的推广，甚至不惜牺牲自己的家庭，间接推广CBW的研究。
代写书稿：什么是功利主义
As clarified by the proportionality doctrine of Mill, the idea of utilitarianism endorses that right action or duty has to be defined with respect to promoting happiness. However, how duty has been related with happiness by Mill still lacks clarity. For understanding the various strands in conception over utilitarianism, there is a need for differentiating between indirect and direct utilitarianism. According to direct utilitarianism, any object related to moral assessment require assessment in proportion by valuing the key outcomes for the happiness in general (Mill 121). Under indirect utilitarianism, the assessment of morality will not be valuing the results for happiness generally, in conformance with good or optimal value of acceptance.So under formulation, indirect and direct utilitarianism are general theories applicable in objectifying the moral assessment. But the key focus is over the duty or the right action.
Action of utilitarianism is a form of most familiarity applicable towards the direct utilitarianism, while the theory of duty is most common in case of indirect utilitarianism.The offer of alternate perspective by Williams is in terms of indirect hedonism. William has suggested that there cannot be attainment of happiness via direct persuading in a manner that can be reference of pleasure. In the case of George, utilitarianism provides that George will be putting aside the squeamishness of self- indulgence. He can take the job for production of CBW due to the positive impacts outweighing the negative impacts that is the discomfort of George (Mill 210). On the other hand, ID tends to be dictating that George provided increased weight towards his own integrity. This is because the key projects will be defining him in agent of morality while opposing CBW. This will not be taking the job for the promotion of CBW, even at the expense to hurt his family, with indirect promotion of CBW research.