(Dodds, Lecture 2) Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism are two theories that attempt to answer the ethical nature of human beings. Kantisme vs utilitarisme Ceux qui ne sont pas étudiants en philosophie, des mots comme utilitarisme et kantisme peuvent sembler étranges, mais pour ceux qui tentent de s'attaquer aux questions d'éthique et de sagesse, ces deux points de vue représentent des points de vue importants. Kantianism does not encourage retributive justice. ix. Each of these braches of Ethics deals with morals, actions, ethical decisions and judgments. ii. ...Intro to Ethics Paper #2 - Motive
iv. This means that the theory holds the importance of duty and motives of an act in higher prestige than the consequences of said act. Theft contradicts perfect duty. There are many different theories in ethics with consequentialism … All that it necessarily opposes is any suggestion that the right option is sometimes fixed on some basis other than that it is the option that maximises expected value. Kantianist Ross argues that duties are absolute. ii. Maxims are rules that are formulated as rules to follow as moral law similar to a divine commandment e.g.
I prayed for the wellness of others, and I prayed for my animals. * Many may see actions as being a temporary thing that is soon forgotten or has disappeared for all time, therefore one may reason that in the long-term just the results remain, hence, the main aspect that mainly matters with regards to an action is its results. "Differences Between Consequentialism and Kantianism." • Utilitarianism says that an act is justified if maximum numbers of people are deriving happiness out of it.
Categorical imperatives are based on maxim or principle, which one rationally wills to guide everyone in the similar situation. For example, someone can encourage a supermarket to donate food to the needy instead of disposing it. Animals should not be slaughtered or chemically tested on for our needs. viii. is strictly prohibited universally. Please join StudyMode to read the full document. The decision making process is easy, less stressful, and common sense oriented.
ones family, fellow citizens/compatriots, class or race. Mill is one of the philosophers who … It is sensible as people take decisions on action seeing through the prism of consequences. Consequentialism may lead bad action to good consequences.
Kantianism and virtue ethics may have much to teach. iii. Please note: comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. Basic proposition of Kantianism is that action of people should not depend upon consequences, rather should be dictated by categorical imperatives that fulfil duty of human being. DifferenceBetween.net. The formula of universal law: Act only on that maxim (a rule that explains the reason for... StudyMode - Premium and Free Essays, Term Papers & Book Notes. Consequentialism encourages retributive justice. Euthanasia denotes any action that terminates the life of an individual in intense and debilitating medical state. There are many similarities between utilitarianism and Kantianism that confuse some people. 4.1 Consequentialism Two types of consequentialism (1) Egoistic and particularistic consequentialism One only takes into consideration how the consequences of an act will affect oneself or a given group – e.g. These principles are the good will, establishing morality by reasoning alone, categorical imperative, duty rather than inclination, and summary and illustration . The entire history of mankind is filled with the story of God’s purposes for us. Secondly, if the agent believes the act respects the goal of human being and does not merely use a human being to maximise utility or pleasure, then the act is moral or ethical. But it cannot be a categorical imperative, because one cannot rationally expect that everyone should act the same way in similar situations. According to the Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy the term ethics is used as synonymous with morality. Killing one person to save lives of another ten is allowed by Consequentialism. No person dared to tell me that I was wrong; no person told me that animals did not belong in heaven. However, Deontology judges morality based on the actions themselves, while Consequentialism judges morality based on the end reaction. One may be tempted to skip purchasing ticket in a crowded train where checking is lackadaisical. Universal rules make varied situations with same moral question. Notify me of followup comments via e-mail, Written by : tapas. Plus points of consequence based ethics or Consequentialism. Kantianism is another famous rule of the nonconsequentialist theory. This was challenged by Bentham long back, and today most modern democratic states have done away with this, and where it is still in practice, an additional clause ‘rarest of rare crime’ is followed. Such evaluation is time consuming, and may defeat the purpose of such evaluation. If reason determines my will, then the will becomes the power to choose independent of he dictates of nature, inclination, circumstance. Kantianism is postulated by Immanuel Kant while Utilitarianism is postulated by … - Determination of the will (Freedom)
Kant thinks there’s only one moral law: the reason that leads us to the law we give ourselves as autonomous selfs is the practical reason that we share as human beings (??!)
Therefore one can conclude that consequentialism is that the validation of actions is to be found in consequences. vi. This meant that we understand intrinsically what our moral duty is; this means that our motives that we act on will be based on what we feel it is our duty to do and then equally important goodwill. vi. It can lead good act to bad consequence. And just like any other human being, I was raised to believe that animals too, go to heaven. Kantianism vs Utilitarianism Those who are not students of philosophy, words like utilitarianism and Kantianism may sound alien, but for those who try to tackle questions of ethics and wisdom, these two represent important viewpoints. It is logical that people should do what increases happiness/welfare or decreases unhappiness/misery. There are a variety of positions, based on the numerous ethical theories that have been developed, that one can take in order to resolve the issue of euthanasia; but the positions I will be looking at in particular, are the positions based on John Stuart Mill's 'Utilitarianism' ethical theory, and Immanuel Kant's 'Categorical Imperative' ethical theory. The CI consists of 3 formulations, the Universal Law, this is the test of the logical possibility of universalizability – “Act only on that maxim which you can at the same time will should become a universal law” which claims that if a maxim is universalizable then if every person were to follow the same maxim then the world would be a more moral place. Consequentialism may violate such laws. If someone breaks a law in order to satisfy a moral imperative, then there are many who may follow the precedent and break a law, even though they might have a moral backing that you wouldn't agree with.