John Stuart Mill Ethical Analysis

552 Words2 Pages

Kant and Mill both try to decide whether the process of doing something is distinguished as right or wrong. They explain that right or wrong is described as moral or immoral. In the writings of Grounding for the Metaphysics of morals Kant says that you only need to “act only according to the maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law” (Kant, 30). Kant then states that a practical principal for how far the human will is concerned is thereby a categorical imperative, that everyone then is necessarily an end, and the end in itself establishes an objective principal of the will and can aid as a practical law (36). Mill on the other hand has the outlook that the greatest happiness principle, or utilitarianism, is that happiness and pleasure are the freedom from pain (Mill, 186). With these principles we will see that Kant and Mill correspond and contradict each other in their moral theories. …show more content…

He universalizes this by saying that if one person lies then everyone lies. Kant says “lying is throwing away and, as it were, the obliteration of ones dignity as a human being” (Kant, 91). Kant then provides us with many strong examples on why he believes lying is unethical. Kant explains the two different kinds of lies, internal and external. Internal lies are worse because man convinces himself that a lie cannot harm anything and can possibly be useful (92). If one does not have a doubt about lying it can be dangerous. Kant says the only fear of man with an incentive to lie is the fear of punishment (92). If lying were to become a universal law the society would be in harm because no one could trust each other and life as a whole would be corrupt. Kant’s explanation of lying remains valid because it goes back to the categorical

Open Document