John Stuart Mill s Utilitarianism And Immanuel Kant s...

A famous psychological and philosophical topic is the trolley question. The trolley question, in variant ways, asks people how they would handle life and death decision making or what is morally good versus what is morally evil. This question falls under the umbrella of moral philosophy, also known as ethics, which asks questions of morality. There are a vast number of moral philosophies one can align themselves with, but two major categories of moral philosophy are the most popular and the most debated. These are John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism and Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative. In looking at the three trolley cases, one can align themselves with either Mill, Kant or create their own perspective. Utilitarianism is†¦show more content†¦By this the objector is saying that reducing life to its total pleasure is disregarding many facets of the human experience. Even farm animals and insects are capable of pleasure, so what would be the defining factor between humans and pigs? Mill replies by saying that we can distinguish between high pleasures and lower pleasure. High pleasures are intellectual in nature, such as winning a game of Monopoly that requires strategic skills. Lower pleasures are simpler pleasures, like the excitement one can get from a piece of candy. Both of these are pleasure-filled, however winning the game of Monopoly would be considered a more intense and higher pleasure that only humans can attain. While utilitarianism is a valid perspective for many, the categorical imperative is another popular choice of moral philosophy. The categorical imperative is Kant’s superordinate principle of moral beings. He believes that what is morally correct needs to be done at all times. The categorical imperative has various renderings with different language to mean all the same thing. For the trolley cases, focusing on Kant’s Formula of Humanity is the most compatible. This formula is also known as The Formula of the End in Itself. The Formula of Humanity states â€Å"Always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, as an end in itself, never as a mere means to an end†. Writer Onora O’Neil explains Kant’s perspective in her own simpler way. HerShow MoreRelated Immanuel Kants Ethics Of Pure Duty and John Stuart Mills Utilitarian Ethics Of Justice2753 Words   |  12 PagesImmanuel Kants The Grounding For The Metaphysics o f Morals and John Stuart Mills 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 thatRead MoreKant And Mill On Animal Ethics Essay1365 Words   |  6 PagesIn this essay I will begin by explaining the overall views of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill, then compare and contrast the ideas and philosophies of Kant and Mill on Animal Ethics. I believe that Kant, the deontologist, will not care as much about the duty/responsibility between humans and animals as Mill, the utilitarian, who will see the extreme importance of animal ethics. After studying and explaining the views and teachings of these two philosophers I will see if my thesis was correct,Read MoreWhat Has Posterity E ver Done For Me By Robert Heilbroner1626 Words   |  7 Pagesresponsibilities towards future generations in regards to preserving the planet. In this paper, I will present Heilbroner s arguments for posterity, in relation to how we treat our environment. In addition, I will compare two ethical theories, Kant s Categorical Imperative to Mill s theory of Utilitarianism. I will then argue as to why Utilitarianism is more plausible in respect to Heilbroner s environmental view on posterity. Furthermore, I will point out why Kantian theory does not at all support the ideaRead MoreArgument For Criticizing Utilitarianism And Deontology1138 Words   |  5 PagesBenny Mutoni Ethics Society Instructor: Joseph John Argument for criticizing utilitarianism and deontology In this paper, I will discuss various ethical courses of action during ethical dilemmas. I will be examining how utilitarians and deontologists use different approaches to solve ethical dilemmas, by citing the text â€Å"Doing Ethics: Moral Reasoning and Contemporary Issues† and views of philosophers such as John Stuart Mill, Immanuel Kant and Jeremy Bentham. Using these, I will develop an argumentRead MoreMoral Judgements Are Morally Wrong?2025 Words   |  9 Pagesaction based on the intention of the action. Immanuel Kant, an eighteenth century German philosopher, is considered a deontologist and one of the pivotal figures in modern philosophy. Alternatively, consequentialism is the view that actions should be deemed morally right or wrong based on the outcomes an action has. A consequentialist would compare the end results of two different actions and their interest is in the conclusion of the action. Utilitarianism is a branch of consequentialism that believesRead MoreEth ical Theories And Deontological Moral Theories2001 Words   |  9 Pagesgoing by this, an action that is consider moral is one that nets a good outcome from the consequences. But on the other hand if the consequences result in a bad way than it is considered immoral. One of the best known theorists for this camp is John Stuart Mill, we will go in to far more detail of his ethics later in this paper. Deontologists are the other branch of normative ethics, which believes that the intention or motive of any action is the true misure of morality. The action of a person is measuredRead MoreImmanuel Kant And John Stuart Mill Essay2002 Words   |  9 Pagesmost widely known ethical philosophers are Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. While they may have philosophized around the same time period, the philosophers have very different ideas about ethics and happiness. Immanuel Kant, author of Duty and Reason, believed in the morality of the good will and duty. He espoused that happiness is an irrelevancy insofar as fulfilling duty is the most important aspect of leading a moral life. Conversely, John Stuart Mill, who wrote, The Greatest Happiness PrincipleRead MoreImmanuel Kant And The Categorical Imperative1437 Words   |  6 PagesImmanuel Kant, a German philosopher, specifically a deontologist, has two imperatives: the hypothetical imperative and the categorical imperative. These imp eratives describe what we ought to do and are only applicable to rational beings because they are the only beings that recognize what they ought or ought not to do. The hypothetical imperative is when an individual’s actions are reasoned by their desire, so they only act with the intention of fulfilling their desires. The categorical imperativeRead MoreComparing Aristotle And John Stuart Mill1130 Words   |  5 Pagesimportant topic, however I intend to concentrate of the famous works of Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, and John Stuart Mill. After meticulously analyzing each of the above philosophers’ texts, I personally prefer the position of utilitarian and Benthamite, John Stuart Mill. After comparing and contrasting the positions and reasonings of these philosophers, I will demonstrate my own reasons why I have chosen John Stuart Mill as the most established in his theory of the role of pleasure in morality. AristotleRead MoreEssay on The Golden Rule in Kant and Mills Ethical Theories1320 Words   |  6 Pagesand purpose. The two most important philosophers that deal with ethics are Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. Kant’s ethical theory is Kantianism or deontological ethics. Mill’s ethical theory is utilitarianism. Both philosophers’ theories have many differences; Kant’s theory deals with conduct, seeking reason for good action in duty. Mill’s theory deals with consequences and maximizing human happiness. However both Kant and Mill’s ethics relate to the important biblical principal of the Golden