Utilitarianism vs. Kantianism

1353 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: kantianism versus utilitarianism

Utilitarianism vs. Kantianism

Ethics can be defined as "the conscious reflection on our moral beliefs with the aim of improving, extending or refining those beliefs in some way." (Dodds, Lecture 2) Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism are two theories that attempt to answer the ethical nature of human beings. This paper will attempt to explain how and why Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism differ as well as discuss why I believe Kant's theory provides a more plausible account of ethics.

Immanuel Kant's deonotological ethical theory assesses if actions are moral based on the person's will or intention of acting. Kant's theory can be categorized as a deonotological because "actions are not assessed to be morally permissible on the basis of consequences they produce, but rather on the form of the agent's will in acting," (Dodds, Lecture 7) therefore his actions are based on duty and not consequential. Kantianism is based on three principles: maxims, willing, and the categorical imperative. Kant states that a maxim is a "general rule or principle which will explain what a person takes himself to be doing and the circumstances in which he takes himself to be doing it" (Feldman, 1999, 201). It is important that this principle be universalisable and that the maxim can be applied consistently to everyone that encounters similar situations, therefore willed as a universal law. The second aspect of Kant's theory is willing. This involves the agent consistently committing oneself to make an action occur. He states that, "In general, we can say that a person wills inconsistently if he wills that p be the case and he wills that q be the case and its impossible for p and q to be the case together" (Feldman, 1999, 203). T...

... middle of paper ...

...nces. Kantianism focuses on the motivation of actions, has clear and distinct set of universal rules, and is morally logical. On the other hand, Utilitarianism relies on the consequences of an action, has no set universal laws as each action is assessed on an individual basis, and morality is based on the results of the assessment. Because of these reasons, I believe that Kantianism is the more ethically plausible theory of the two.

Bibliography:

Susan Dodds, Lecture 2 notes, 'Utilitarianism.'

Susan Dodds, Lecture 7 notes, 'Kantianism.'

Fred Feldman, 'Kant's Ethics Theory: Exposition and Critique' from H. J. Curzer, ed Ethical Theory and Moral Problems, Belmont, Ca: Wadsworth Publishing Co. 1999.

J.S. Mill, 'What Utilitarianism Is' from Peter Y. Windt, An Introduction to Philosophy: Ideas in Conflict, St Paul, MN: West Publishing, 1982.

Show More
Related

  • Immanuel Kant's Ethical Theory: The Philosophical Study Of Morality

    1964 Words  | 4 Pages

    Kantianism is named after a German philosopher Immanuel Kant, who lived in 1724-1804. According to Kant, the only thing that is good is good will; moreover, the good will builds the whole structure of the society. Kantianism is based on the intent of the action or person’s intention which are the predominant attributes of the good will. The basic principle of Kantianism theory depicts the idea of universal truths. It explains that a moral rule must be universal. Also, it describes that people should be treated with respect. Moreover, it explains the credibility of an action why it is right or wrong and convinces the user with logical reasons. Kant proposed the Categorical Imperative, which describes a set up to explain, “What makes a moral rule appropriate?” One version of the Categorical Imperative states that it is wrong for a person to use himself or another person uniquely as a means to an end. Most of the time it is easier to use the second version of the Categorical Imperative to analyze a moral problem from a Kantian point of view. For example, in the case of Jean, misusing the responsibilities of someone else’s duty. It was wrong for Jean to treat the profession of the doctor as a means to an end. Jean deceived the profession of the doctors with the goal of getting benefit to save his nephew. It was wrong for jean to misuse his responsibilities rather than to think that he can find a way to look for a doctor. We can also look at this scenario using the first version of the Categorical Imperative. Jean wanted to save his nephew Pierre. A proposed moral rule might be, “Take a decision in his hands to save his nephew.” However, if everyone followed the same rule, it will diminish the sense of duty, responsibility, and the respect of the profession. If everyone will act the same way in this type of situation and try to misuse his or her professional responsibilities, then there will

    Read More

  • Bernard Williams's Critique Of Kantian Moral Theory

    1104 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this paper, I will argue that Kant provides us with a plausible account of morality. To demonstrate that, I will initially offer a main criticism of Kantian moral theory, through explaining Bernard Williams’ charge against it. I will look at his indulgent of the Kantian theory, and then clarify whether I find it objectionable. The second part, I will try to defend Kant’s theory.

    Read More

  • Why Torture is Morally Wrong

    2139 Words  | 5 Pages

    Pojman, L. (2002). 6: Utilitarianism. Ethics: discovering right and wrong (pp. 104-113). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Read More

  • Kant's Moral Theory, By Immanuel Kant

    1365 Words  | 3 Pages

    Immanuel Kant is a philosopher of the early centuries, one of his well-known works is his moral theory which can be referred to as Deontology. The moral theory arises from the principle behind Deontology which is derived from -deon which signifies rule or law and -ology which means the study of. Kant designed his moral theory to be contradictory to utilitarianism which is a moral theory that focuses on the outcomes of an action. Beside other factors the moral theory is a non-consequentialist moral theory which in basic terms means the theory follows a law based system of making judgements and disregards the consequences. Kant once said “Actions are only morally good if they are done because of a good will” however, for Kant a good will is complex

    Read More

  • Two Different Versions of the Moral Saint

    1044 Words  | 3 Pages

    Mill, John Stuart. "Utilitarianism." Gendler, Tamar Szabo, Susanna Siegel and Steven M. Cahn. The Elements of Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. 77-80.

    Read More

  • Euthanasia and Ethics: Kant and Stewart Mill

    950 Words  | 2 Pages

    Mill, John Stewart. "Utilitarianism: John Stewart Mill." Fifty Readings Plus: An Introduction to Philosophy. Ed. Donald C. Abel. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 2004. 416-25. Print.

    Read More

  • Aristotelian versus Kantian Ethics

    1474 Words  | 3 Pages

    Aristotle's and Kant's ideas of the means and ends of moral ethics are in sharp contrast. Both have strengths and weaknesses in their arguments, but Aristotle's is superior to Kant's because it is more realistic. I will first give the basis of both philosophies, Aristotle first, Kant second. Next, I will expand and question points of both philosophies, Aristotle's end, and Kant's means. Lastly, I will explain the reasoning behind why I favor Aristotle's ethics over Kant's. Both philosophies appeals to reason, but they come to different conclusions.

    Read More

  • Cyber Security, Ethics, And Ethics

    1447 Words  | 3 Pages

    Kant theory is saying that everyone must do things for the right reasons. According to Deontological ethics theory, an action is considered favourable sometimes because of some good aspect of action in itself without considering its good result from the action. This theory is much based upon the one’s morals and values which expresses the “sake of duty” and virtue. Deontology tells us to be fair and not to take advantage of others while teleology tells about doing whatever we want and it gives us a result that is good to us. [17]

    Read More

  • Difference Between Relativism And Utilitarianism

    255 Words  | 1 Pages

    Utilitarianism is defined as an ethical doctrine that virtue is based on utility, and that conduct should be directed toward promoting the greatest happiness of the greatest number of persons. Relativism is defined as a theory that value judgments, as of truth, beauty, or morality that have no universal validity but are valid for an individual or group of individuals. The difference between the two is that relativism is a view of what is right and what is wrong ethically and utilitarianism is a theory that doesn't consider the feelings of an individual or group of individuals. To provide a better understanding of the difference between these two terms is to notice while both terms are ethical behaviors, relativism doesn't consider what happens

    Read More

  • Kant vs. Mill: Human Rights and Utilitarianism

    1725 Words  | 4 Pages

    Mill, J. S., Bentham, J., & Ryan, A. (1987). Utilitarianism and other essays. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.

    Read More

  • Kant And Rule Utilitarianism Analysis

    909 Words  | 2 Pages

    The difference between the two comes to Kantian theory doesn 't account for the consequences and rule utilitarianism does. For Kant, it doesn 't matter what happens as a result of your will and duty as the law as it doesn 't compromise the sovereignty of other rational beings. The rule utilitarianism main goal is to maximize collective human happiness and welfare, and unlike Kant, how believes that one should under no circumstance breaks, your own Maxim thus severing the like between Duty and Will. Rule utilitarianism allows more flexibility in people 's actions and behaviors

    Read More

  • Kant's Categorical Imperative

    1532 Words  | 4 Pages

    Deontology is the ethical view that some actions are morally forbidden or permitted regardless of consequences. One of the most influential deontological philosophers in history is Immanuel Kant who developed the idea of the Categorical Imperative. Kant believed that the only thing of intrinsic moral worth is a good will. Kant says in his work Morality and Rationality “The good will is not good because of what it affects or accomplishes or because of it’s adequacy to achieve some proposed end; it is good only because of it’s willing, i.e., it is good of itself”. A maxim is the generalized rule that characterizes the motives for a person’s actions. For Kant, a will that is good is one that is acting by the maxim of doing the right thing because it is right thing to do. The moral worth of an action is determined by whether or not it was acted upon out of respect for the moral law, or the Categorical Imperative. Imperatives in general imply something we ought to do however there is a distinction between categorical imperatives and hypothetical imperatives. Hypothetical imperatives are obligatory so long as we desire X. If we desire X we ought to do Y. However, categorical imperatives are not subject to conditions. The Categorical Imperative is universally binding to all rational creatures because they are rational. Kant proposes three formulations the Categorical Imperative in his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Moral, the Universal Law formulation, Humanity or End in Itself formulation, and Kingdom of Ends formulation. In this essay, the viablity of the Universal Law formulation is tested by discussing two objections to it, mainly the idea that the moral laws are too absolute and the existence of false positives and false negatives.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism, Kant's Deontological Ethics, And Virtue Ethics

    1027 Words  | 3 Pages

    As a deontological, or duty-based, theory, Kantianism is focus on intent. If the intent behind an action is morally praiseworthy and fits into the categorical imperative, it must be ethical. The categorical imperative is the main element in Kantianism, and it states that you must act as if it was universal law. This is similar to the Golden Rule of “treat others how you wish to be treated” and is a way to determine whether an act is morally praiseworthy. Kantian ethics are different from utilitarianism in that happiness is not a

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Utilitarianism And Kantian Ethics

    843 Words  | 2 Pages

    First we will start with the historical example of the execution of Jesus. Pontius Pilate was put into a situation where a large crowd had attempted to persuade him that Jesus should be killed instead of a convicted murderer, even though Jesus had done nothing wrong. The majority won and he was killed. The Utilitarians can justify this action because the majority gained happiness from this. On the other hand, those who support Kant’s theory will argue that Jesus had done nothing wrong and his right were clearly violated making the action

    Read More

  • Deontology and Utilitarianism: Ethical Theories for Nurses

    1121 Words  | 3 Pages

    Johnson, R. (2013). Kant’s moral philosophy. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2013 Edition). Zalta, E. (Ed.). Retrieved online from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2013/entries/kant-moral/

    Read More

More about Utilitarianism vs. Kantianism

Open Document