Immanuel Kant believed our moral decisions are based on categorical imperative. Categorical meaning absolute, something is true all the time and imperative meaning something is very important or necessary. (Merriam-Webster, n.d.). Kant believed consequences of an action should not dictate your decision making process. You make ethical decision because they are morally right, for everyone. (Matt, n.d.)
John Stuart Mill considered the consequences of an action, this is called consequentialism. Mill created the idea of utilitarianism, meaning “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” (Mill, 1863) You should do what matters for the greater good and not just one. (Lee, 2000) The same ethical reasoning multiple people would use may not have the same result.
Sam Harris, “In Defense of Torture” presents an idea that it’s ok to torture when there is a greater good. He starts his discussion with the ticking time bomb case reinforcing his idea with justifiable torture. If that’s not enough to convince you Sam Harris tries to make the situation more personal. Turning to a nuclear bomb in Manhattan or if you have a child maybe the thought of your daughter on the brink of death...
... middle of paper ...
...Mill? It’s easy to see the Fried’s fit nicely into the ideology of duty ethics. Harris is right there with Mill in doing what is right for the greater good. While Harris is trying to be a do gooder and the Fried’s are sticking with treating everyone the same, Dershowitz proposes better outcome. His ideas would not be endorsed by the ideology of Deontology or Utilitarianism; his idea would fit under the umbrella of Consequentialism.
John Stuart Mill studied Immanuel Kant work. Just as Kant helped establish a frame work for Mill, Kant and Mill will help establish rules/laws for morality and ethical decision making for torture. As our society changes so do our ideas and beliefs. Stances on ethics have softened and I believe people as a whole want to protect humanity, with greater concern to the underprivileged, the war torn, the minorities and the ones unhappy.
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- Even though at the first glance, the two most influential philosophers in human history - Immanuel Kant and John-Stuart Mill seem to have a lot of disagreements on the central concepts of their moral philosophies – for example, while Kant is concerned more about the intentions of an action, Mill, on the other hand, believes that the consequences of an action are the only justification necessary for an act to be good or moral or right, they still have beliefs in common, such as the concept of the greater good and base their moral systems on a fundamental first principle.... [tags: Morality, Ethics, Utilitarianism, Immanuel Kant]
1502 words (4.3 pages)
- When you ask your friend what ethics means to them you may get a different answer. You may hear responses that reference religion, laws or whatever feels morally right. The framework for ethics suggest that feelings, religion, law, science, and cultural influences should not be considered when determining if what your about to do is ethical. Here is what you do consider ethical reasoning, • Utilitarian, do the most good or the least amount of harm. • Rights, treat people with dignity and not a means to an ends, if you can’t treat everyone ethically then it should be fair.... [tags: Ethics, Morality, Deontological ethics]
1435 words (4.1 pages)
- Animal Experimentation The works of philosophers Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill have been used more substantively in animal advocacy movements, even though Mill’s utilitarianism was genuinely animal amicable at the time; he believed that in any circumstance the right action would be the action that have a tendency to minimize the pain and suffering, and expand the pleasure and happiness, of all humans and animals which in return should impact our treatment of animals. Immanuel Kant a philosopher who is often mention in animal advocacy movement did not believe we had any direct ethical duties to animal.... [tags: Animal rights, Animal testing]
992 words (2.8 pages)
- In the making of my own argument on the elements that justify a right or wrong action, I will reference two of the most influential philosophers, Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. In order to make this paper easy to follow, I intend to focus on one of the arguments formed by each of these men. I will evaluate how both of Kant and Mill’s principles fits into the morals of right and wrong. Kant gives us a categorical imperative that urges one to Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law (Kant), and Mill states that actions are right as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness (Mi... [tags: Right, Wrong, Philosophy]
957 words (2.7 pages)
- Happiness. People go to any means by which to obtain the many varied materials and issues that induce pleasures in each individual, and intrinsically, this emotion remains the ultimate goal, John Stuart Mill, a nineteenth century philosopher, correctly advocated the pursuit of happiness, and maintained the concept that above all other values, pleasure existed as the final destination, Mill's hedonistic views correctly and rationally identified a natural human tendency, and his Utilitarian arguments strongly support the theory that above all else, happiness is the most important dream to be fulfilled.... [tags: Utilitarianism Essays]
1354 words (3.9 pages)
- Utilitarianism is a difficult topic to fathom, for it requires a large amount of questions and self-evaluation. In order to understand utilitarianism, think of bad versus bad. A principle stating that when one is faced with two difficult decisions, which choice would be less harmful for all of those involved. John Stuart Mill and Bernard Williams describe utilitarianism as pain versus pleasure or the lesser of two evils approach, and how that approach ties into ones ultimate choice. Utilitarianism is not about the pursuit of happiness, rather, it is really about picking which evil is the best evil.... [tags: Ethics, Immanuel Kant, Morality, John Stuart Mill]
934 words (2.7 pages)
- Immanuel Kant Versus John Stuart Mill Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill; two opposing philosophers of their time. Even though they were living in different countries, their works have been against each other. In his book, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant argues that there is nothing better than wanting goodwill by itself. He emphasizes the importance of goodwill over and over again and tries to show how effective moral philosophy can be if goodwill is used as the key element.... [tags: Papers Philosophy Morals Moral Essays ]
1168 words (3.3 pages)
- Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill are credited for developing the idea of utilitarianism. Simply put, utilitarianism is doing the most good for the greatest amount of people. In this ethical system, an individuals rights are essentially less important than the good of the majority. Happiness is what is valued in this ethical system. Ultimately, the action that leads to the most good is the right ethical action. Basically, no act is simply right or wrong, but rather it depends on the happiness that comes out doing that act.... [tags: Ethics, Morality, Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill]
711 words (2 pages)
- Compare Mill and Kant's ethical theories; which makes a better societal order. John Stuart Mill (1808-73) believed in an ethical theory known as utilitarianism. There are many formulation of this theory. One such is, "Everyone should act in such a way to bring the largest possibly balance of good over evil for everyone involved." However, good is a relative term. What is good. Utilitarians disagreed on this subject. Mill made a distinction between happiness and sheer sensual pleasure. He defines happiness in terms of higher order pleasure (i.e.... [tags: Societal Order Universability]
3195 words (9.1 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.... [tags: Kant Mill Philosophy Philosophers Essays]
2744 words (7.8 pages)