According to the final stage of Mill’s proof of utilitarianism, nothing other than happiness is desirable. Mill considers a possible counterexample, virtue, and claims that it is part of happiness. This paper provides an interpretation of that claim. Arguments are offered against Fred Berger’s non hedonistic and pluralistic interpretation of happiness, and against John Skorupski’s view that Mill believed that virtue is desired under the idea of it as pleasant. Finally, it is suggested that by ‘virtue’ Mill must mean ‘the enjoyable experience of being virtuous’.
