ipl-logo

Kant Vs Utilitarian Theory

1111 Words5 Pages

Name Institution Course Date Mill versus Kant Mill believes that to create any philosophic theory; it is important to appeal to pre-philosophic practices. The pre-philosophic practices are grounded on taking particular things to be reasonably believed or to be desirable. For example, if x1, x2, x3 up to xn add up to P, then, there is enough reason to believe that xn+1 is equal to P. Further, a sensation is generally pleasurable and that there is reason to yearn for that sensation hence delivering higher utilitarianism. However, the crucial question is if the reasons recognized reflect the actual structure of the world or the real structure of value and how should individuals defend everyday reason? Kant, in a similar relationship, offers possible …show more content…

Utilitarianism makes ethical decisions based on the results that the action will cause. However, for the Kantian theory, it is believed that human reason is the only pure good, and they disregard the consequences. Kant discusses that the mentioned human reason should be devoid of the influence of desires or emotions. This opposes the Utilitarian view that ignores motives of an action as not important and approves the consequences. According to Kant, a purely good act is performed due to the person’s obligation to the categorical imperative. On the contrary, utilitarianism states that a good ethical decision is gauged by the amount of pleasure that the act …show more content…

For example, Kant would consider a murder wrong because it goes contrary to the demands of practical reason. However, utilitarianism would examine the context of the murder to determine whether the murder under consideration produces a higher level of pleasure for the affected people. In this case, murdering of terrorists is considered right by the utilitarian theory. The debate between Mill and Kant is based on whether duty can be compromised with an appeal to consequences. In this case would killing a person be justified if it benefits many people than it harms. According to Kant, Killing is not justified in any situation even if the person is a mugger or a dictator. The disadvantage of Kant’s theory is that it fails to account for the particular context in which an act is

Show More
Related
1311 Words | 6 Pages

In other words, the only effect of an action that is relevant is the bad and good outcomes it produces (Henry, 2011). It is notable that people who uphold utilitarianism believe that morality has the purpose of making life better by way of increasing

Read More
486 Words | 2 Pages

Is it justifiable to kill in order to get revenge and peace? The death of Matt and Ruth’s son, Frank altered their lives. Losing their son put them in a dark place taking an enormous toll over their profound emotions. The hatred for Richard Strout, grew stronger daily. The story “Killings” Author Andre Dubus displayed disputes with the values of compassion, courage, and fairness.

Read More
362 Words | 2 Pages

Now we have a justifiable reason not to kill, because killing someone deprives them of the happiness they enjoyed while be alive, and we can also conclude that there is a justifiable reason to kill when life holds more unhappiness than happiness according act utilitarianism. For example someone who is suffering through a terminal illness

Read More
5639 Words | 23 Pages

Before Kant, moral philosophy was dominated by Crusius’s sense of divine morality which stipulates that the will of a person has to be in accordance with the will of God. Wolff’s notion of moral perfection adds that we should strive to procedurally achieve our sense of moral obligation to the degree that the ends or effects of a particular action are based on our ability to calculate perfection. Kant concludes that Wolff’s postulates are virtually impossible in attempting perfection in 1764 in his Prize Essay ,‘‘now I can with little effort show how I became convinced, after much thought, that the rule ‘do the most perfect action which for you is possible’. ’’ (Prize Essay.2:229) Crusius and Wolff’s arguments essentially appeal to the un-provable

Read More
1217 Words | 5 Pages

Utilitarianism is the moral theory that the action that people should take it the one that provides the greatest utility. In this paper I intend to argue that utilitarianism is generally untenable because act and rule utilitarianism both have objections that prove they cannot fully provide the sure answer on how to make moral decisions and what will be the ultimate outcome. I intend to do this by defining the argument for act and rule utilitarianism, giving an example, presenting the objections to act and rule utilitarianism and proving that utilitarianism is untenable. Both act and rule utilitarianism attempt to argue that what is right or wrong can be proven by what morally increases the well being of people. Act utilitarianism argues that

Read More
812 Words | 4 Pages

The Enlightenment, or The Age of Reason, was an age of new ideas that brought great change to the west. One area that had to be rethought was that of morality and ethics. People had to begin to justify morality without using religion or Aristotle’s idea of telos. John Locke approaches this topic by saying that morality is grounded in rights that all humans have by virtue of being human, and David Hume believes that morality is grounded in sentiments. Immanuel Kant had a much different approach.

Read More
609 Words | 3 Pages

The idea behind Kantian Ethics is that doing the right thing is not about the consequences of our actions but rather the principle motivating the action. Actions must be performed out of duty, that is, it is done solely because we have an obligation to perform such action out of respect for the moral law. As explained by Immanuel Kant, “the moral worth of an action done out of duty has its moral worth” (105). Kant argues that to act morally, then, is to “act only on the maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law” (108). Utilitarianism, developed by John Stuart Mill, is one of the most commonly used approaches in making moral decisions.

Read More
1313 Words | 6 Pages

In his essay called Utilitarianism, he supports the value as moral. Mill defines utilitarianism as a principle that “holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” He says that happiness is an intended

Read More
551 Words | 3 Pages

Although I believe in doing what is morally right, all situations and scenarios aren’t the same. What if we are faced with another war, Kantians would think it would be wrong to murder no matter the circumstance which would jeopardize our entire country. The problem with the Utilitarian approach is its too relative. Morals would be a thing of the past and people would take the law into their own hands. This view allows much room for selfishness as people could feel it would be fine to kill someone if others don’t like the person

Read More
1218 Words | 5 Pages

The main principle of utilitarianism is happiness. People who follow this theory strive to fulfill the “ultimate good”. The “ultimate good” is defined as ultimate pleasure with out any pain. It is said that the pleasure can be of any quantity and any quality, but pleasures that are weighted more important are put at a higher level than others that are below it. This ethical theory also states that if society would fully embrace utilitarianism then people would naturally realize their moral standing in the

Read More
866 Words | 4 Pages

Moral theories are theories that help us distinguish between a right or a wrong action. Adequate moral theories help us understand that what we should or shouldn’t do in certain situations. Two of the most famous moral theories are Utilitarianism and Kantianism. According to Utilitarianism, an action is right if only if it out of all the other action gives out the maximum utility. In oppose to that, Kantianism says that an action is right if and only if, in performing that action, the person does not treat anyone as a mean and treats everyone as an end in itself.

Read More
749 Words | 3 Pages

he agrees with what is mentioned above, that the right action is what brings pleasure, for the greatest number. Moreover, Mill argues that “we should be concerned with the quality of pleasure we produce, where pleasures that result from the exercise of uniquely human capacities are said to be superior to the that result from the capacities we have in common with other animals”. Thus Mill’s version of utilitarianism is sometimes characterized into maximizing happiness rather than pleasure. Utilitarianism clarifies that what makes us happy is not necessarily to be the right action.

Read More
1228 Words | 5 Pages

As it has been shown, the utilitarian view has its strengths and is certainly logical in some cases, however, Kantian ethics offer a more stable set of moral

Read More
871 Words | 4 Pages

Immanuel Kant’s moral theory differs greatly from the other theories we have learned about, especially Mill’s view of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is based on the consequences of actions, while Kantian Ethics focuses on the intentions a person has before they act, and if they are fulfilling their duty as a person when acting. Kant explains his theory by providing examples of different people who are all doing the same action, but for different reasons. He discusses a store owner who charges everyone equal prices and explains that this only has moral worth if he is acting from duty, meaning he does this because it is what is right. The act is not moral if he acts in accordance with duty, or because he is worried about his reputation or business.

Read More
1000 Words | 4 Pages

When France fell under the Nazi occupation, Andre and Magda Trocme did all in their power to save Jewish people from the vicious hands of the Nazis. As the Pastor of a town, Andre encouraged the people to give shelter for Jewish refugees. Even when the Vichy authorities order him to provide a list of the Jews in the town, he refused and said: "We do not know what a Jew is. We only know human beings" (Hallie, 1979, p.103). Was his lie just?

Read More

More about Kant Vs Utilitarian Theory

Open Document