Autonomy Vs Utilitarian Ethics

For Kant, Morality is based on choice, or autonomy. If someone has the right of an autonomous will, they act based upon an action because it is simply desirable. In Contrast, Utilitarian’s believe that morality should be centered on what will bring the greatest happiness. I aim to demonstrate that Kant is right in his proposal on morality and autonomy by understanding and recognizing the flaws in the Utilitarian concept, and lastly addressing why Kant’s approach is more preferable. Before I address why Kant’s views on morality and the human autonomy is more preferable, it is important to understand what is being said on the Utilitarian’s terms. There have been many misconceptions that Utility is against pleasure, when in actuality

To explain, hunger causes pain, therefore, hunger is evil. In order to create the most happiness, one must evaluate the moral worth of their action based on the overall consequences for its people, in relations to pleasure and pain. To further explain, in order to decrease pain we must distribute food to the unfortunate, because less hunger is less pain. Though Utilitarianism has beneficial views, there is, however, a problem with this. A Utilitarian’s action is driven by consequences that is set to cause the greatest happiness. This could be an unruly doing because if there was no consequences set forth an immoral act, a person is likely to commit it. To illustrate, take a cashier clerk for an example. If the cashier clerk always returned exact change in fear of possibly losing customers this would not be considered acting with

Kant would answer back with concept that we are motivated to act morally out of moral duty. Take, for instance, a police officer. Any respectable police officer will have a sense of duty to protect and keep their community safe. The motivation does not rely on some desire of pleasure or happiness, but because a police officer would protect his community out of moral duty even if it causes him to go against his own happiness or pleasure. Although not all police officers act out of moral duty, Kant has put in place a duty that is understood to be respected by the human autonomy but also promotes freedom will.

Moral worth of an action does not lie in the effect expected from it, nor in any principle of action which requires to borrow its motive from this expected effect. For all these effects agreeableness of one’s condition, and even promotion of the happiness of others could have also brought about by other causes, so that for this there would have been no need of the will of a rational being; whereas it is in alone that the supreme and unconditional good can be found.