Kant vs. Mill

1576 WordsNov 27, 20117 Pages
Kant vs Mills in Animal Rights In this essay I will cover the philosophy of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. I will begin by covering Kant perspective of rational beings and his idea of a priori learning. I will then move on to his idea of categorical imparaitive. After Kant I will discuss Mill’s utilitarian theory regarding pleasure and pain. With a better understanding of those I will move to Mill’s idea of a posteriori and hypothetical imperative. Following the ideas of these philosophers I will attempt to depict their viewpoints of the issue of animal cruelty through experimentation. To conclude the essay I will state my stance and who’s side, if either, I take in the animal cruelty controversy. First, I will talk…show more content…
The people saved produced more happiness than the pain of one death. On the other hand, had someone killed Hitler and a more deviant person taken Hitler’s position, and retaliated by capturing and killing even more innocent people the act of killing Hitler would have been morally wrong. At no point is the act of killing wrong just the consequence that it produces. Mills believes the highest good will follow the principle of utility. The principle of utility argues that actions that produce the most happiness are the morally correct thing to do. Therefore the basis of the consequences determines what we are morally obligated to do. Mills thinks that we should know what to do based on experience and observation, also known as a posteriori. This is opposite from Kant believing that those factors should not count in moral decisions. Mill also believes that actions should be made in order to gain other things, this is call hypothetical imperative. With a better understanding of these philosophers I would like to put them in a debate over animal rights. Focusing on kant’s arguments, I believe that he would share my overall idea that animals do not possess rights. Kant believes that only humans beings are rational due to the fact that only humans can conceive, compose, and understand statements that can become universal laws. I believe that animals cannot learn in an a priori manner because they are tied to instinctive and stimulus
Open Document