Immanuel Kant's Ethics Of Pure Duty and John Stuart Mill's Utilitarian Ethics Of Justice

2744 Words11 Pages
Immanuel Kant's The Grounding For The Metaphysics of Morals and John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism

Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill are philosophers who addressed the issues of morality in terms of how moral traditions are formed. Immanuel Kant has presented one viewpoint in "The Grounding For The Metaphysics of Morals" that is founded on his belief that the worth of man is inherent in his ability to reason. John Stuart Mill holds another opinion as presented in the book, "Utilitarianism" that is seemingly in contention with the thoughts of Kant. What is most distinctive about the ethics of morality is the idea of responsibilities to particular individuals. According to Kant and Mill, moral obligations are not fundamentally particularistic in this way because they are rooted in universal moral principles. Mill and Kant are both philosophers whom have made great impact on their particular fields of philosophy and a critique of their theories in relation to each other may help develop a better understanding to them and their theories individually.

Mill?s utilitarianism theory is a version of the ideal judgment theory. So is Kant?s, but there are differences. Mill holds an empiricist theory while Kant holds a rationalist theory. Kant grounds morality in forms that he believes, are necessary to free and rational practical judgment, namely his deontological ethics. Mill?s utilitarian theory is a form of consequentialism because the rightness or wrongness of an act is determined by the consequences. Thus, deontologicalism and consequentialism are the main criticisms for both these theories. Kant?s ethics of pure duty is the basis for his categorical imperative, which provides the basis for his universalist duty based theory. Mill?s theory of utilitarianism is a primary form of consequentialism. Both deontologicalism and consequentialism are valid points of argument to the ethics of an action but they are also argumentative towards each other. Mill, in his later work, On Liberty, adds deontologicalism to correct his consequentialist view.

John Stuart Mill, who made utilitarianism the subject of one of his philosophical treatise Utilitarianism (1863), is the most proficient defender of this doctrine after Jeremy Bentham. His contribution to the theory consists in his recognition of distinctions of quality, in addition to those of intensity, among pleasu...

... middle of paper ...

... will is the distinction of rational beings to all else, we may take this direction to always respecting the will of others. However, Kant cannot expect that we never act contrary to someone's will because this could not be followed in a situation where wills conflict. It might be closer to Kant's idea to interpret him as requiring persons always to respect others as capable of acting for principles, and thus ably prepared to restrain our actions towards others if they or we could not will our maxim to be universal law.

Works Cited:

Mill, John Stuart, Utilitarianism, Hackett Publishing Company Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana, 1979, Original Publication, 1861

Kant Immanuel, Grounding For The Metaphysics Of Morals, Third Edition, Hackett Publishing Company Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana, 1993, Original Publication, 1785

Internet Sources Consulted

Kant, Immanuel. “Selections from Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals.” Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals (1993): 104-112. Blackboard. Web. 12 Apr. 2015.

Mill, John Stuart, Utilitarianism, N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2015. .

More about Immanuel Kant's Ethics Of Pure Duty and John Stuart Mill's Utilitarian Ethics Of Justice

Open Document