That's a circular argument, because the whole point of moral philosphy is to define what 'the good' is. Utilitarianism defines it as human happiness, or pleasure. This was to get away from the idea that the good was what god told us was good.

Mill tried to distinguish higher pleasures from lower ones, while primitive utilitarianism said all pleasures were equal.

I've got to leave the computer now, so I can't follow this conversation for a while.