Utilitarianism Vs. Kantian Theory

Ethics can be defined as "the conscious reflection on our moral beliefs with the aim of improving, extending or refining those beliefs in some way." (Dodds, Lecture 2) Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism are two theories that attempt to answer the ethical nature of human beings. This paper will attempt to explain how and why Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism differ as well as discuss why I believe Kant's theory provides a more plausible account of ethics.

     Ethics is one part of philosophy that will always be studied, and like most subjects in philosophy, will never be viewed the same by everyone. There are so many cultures that have so many different beliefs about the way a person's life should be lived out. Things like religion, poverty, and mental health all contribute to our beliefs in ethics. Some people believe that the mental state of a person or the motive for that person committing a crime should be factors when sentencing time comes. Others think that no matter the situation, a crime is a crime, and no compassion should be felt for the guilty. In the studies of philosophy these beliefs are put into two categories:

John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham have been recognized as the founders of Utilitarianism. Contrary to Kant’s moral theories, Utilitarian’s would disagree with most of Kant’s theory. While Kant believed that it is the intention of the action that should be recognized as moral or unmoral, J.S Mill and Bentham would say that it is in fact the outcome of said action that determines morality.

he question about whether utilitarianism or Kantianism gives a more accurate understanding for our moral obligations is brought up there are two different arguments. One argument by Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mills and Andrew Gustafson is in favor of utilitarianism and the other one is by Immanuel Kant and Norman E. Bowie, which is in favor of Kantianism. With more information and knowledge on the two ethical theories, you will realize that Kantianism gives a more accurate understanding for our moral obligations.

As the founder of utilitarianism, Bentham believes that an act is considered “just” if it produces the most happiness and the least pain for the greatest number of people affected directly, or indirectly by that action. For Bentham, happiness means giving sovereignty to pleasure over pain. Contrarily, Kant proposes that only duty and rules should dictate our actions, as the outcome is beyond our control. To Kant the only thing that matters is good will. His theory suggests that an action is either “just” or “unjust” regardless of the consequences of that same action. Bentham tried to attain his theory through hedonism and Kant his through universal maxims, neither theory beneficial to everyone. In addition, Jeremy Bentham’s theory is flawed because it only considers the most happiness caused by a moral action, it neglects minorities. Similarly, Kant fully ignoring the consequences of a moral action is not a worthy idea, because at times, we may have more than one duty or obligation to

As the world witnessed the horrors of 9/11 and the ensuing Global War on Terror committed by different belligerents, it found itself in an ethical debate as how it was to respond to this reality. The Church found itself in a particularly peculiar situation as it is widely regarded as a moral compass a majority of all people of earth.

Immanuel Kant has been recognized in his significant views regarding moral philosophy and metaphysics. It is his argument that immorality involves violation of categorical imperatives, which is basically irrational. Happiness has been considered by many philosophers as the ultimate ends (Greenberg, 2001). Many people exist and strive for everything in order to obtain happiness. It is the natural human tendency to seek happiness in his life, and claimed by a lot of utilitarian theorists as the most important thing every human being should achieve. For utilitarian, happiness can be obtained through intelligence and greater level of achievements.

Did you know that the “the transportation sector [alone] is responsible for over 50% of NOx total emissions, over 30% of VOCs emissions, and over 20% of PM emissions in the U.S.” (United States Environmental Protection Agency)? Because the effect of these pollutants is not immediately felt, many engineers do not hesitate to bypass these regulations. James Liang is no exception. A recent publication unveiled the truth behind the emission’s release of one of Volkswagen’s models. Unable to design an engine that complied with the US emissions regulations, Volkswagen instead developed a software that would fool the emissions exam. The software was designed so that the vehicle would operate using the appropriate emissions release during the exam

John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant are widely renowned in the philosophical world for their ethical theories. Both philosophers have unique perspectives when it comes to the world of ethics. Mill’s Utilitarianism and Kant’s ethical theory interpret the concept of morality differently. Even though both theories have their difference, they also bring a new perspective to morality that I never thought about before.

Jeremy Bentham founded Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is to defend the view that those acts that produce the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people are right and good” (Deininger 2015). This theory focuses on the outcome of an action that leads to good. The action considered to be good to the greatest number of people affected by action. Immanual Kant Moral theory is applied to everyone no matter what the situation is. Appling it to all people regardless of the scenario faced. “The Kant’s basic moral principle is comparable for his moral philosophy to the principle of utility for utilitarians. It is Kant’s test for right and wrong” (McKinnon 2015).

Instagram’s move to make a profit from advertising by changing the terms of service failed to meet the company’s objective and destroyed the trust of the users, the most significant players for the success of the entity. Changing the privacy policy and term of use without informing the 12 million daily users was way beyond an ethical thing to do. To illustrate the argument, the act will be examined using two ethical theories namely, Utilitarianism and Kantianism. Before tackling on these theories, we must understand that Ethics are the moral principles where we base our assessment for what is right or wrong (Birt et. al. 2014) and how such action may affect others (Zhu, May & Avolio, 2010). The belief that such action is morally right or

“What is the right thing to do?” This question is something we’ve all asked ourselves at some point or another in our lives, and it’s likely that Claire asked herself the same thing. Regardless of personal views on morality, most people don’t set out with the intention to do the wrong thing. Most people believe that they are doing the right thing whatever the right thing may be. Should Claire tell her friend Beth that Tony cheated on her? Many people already have their answer ready to that question, and they will justify their answer of yes or no in several ways with the belief that it would be the right thing to do. There are many philosophical theories that address morality and what is right, but to apply them all would take time and space that is simply not permitted. Consequentially, the case study will be analyzed from the perspectives of Utilitarianism and Kantianism.

Utilitarianism is thought to be one of the most powerful and persuasive consequentialist approaches to normative ethics. (Plamenatz, 1) Consequentialism is defined as the theory that the value and especially the moral value of an act should be judged by the value of its consequences. (Merriam Webster Dictionary, 4) Utilitarianism was created by Jeremy Bentham in a book published, in the year 1789, titled An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. The book defined the principle of utility, which led to the formation of the utilitarian theory. Jeremy Bentham was born in London, England in 1748. He was an English philosopher, economist, and theoretical jurist from 1763 to 1832. (Plamenatz, 2) Bentham’s utilitarian theory

Has anyone of us witnessed a team discussing an ethical decision involving a specific case study with many conflicting versions of the story? It is interesting to follow. Some of the debate participants feel so confident about being "right" that they will persist until they win the hearts of their opponents. Some participants will just waffle and attempt to analyze the situation from variant dimensions (Lukas 72). Analyzing a specific Case Study relating to terms of confidentiality, this document looks into definitions of morality under two independent systems- Kantianism and Utilitarianism theoretical approaches. This paper seeks to

In this essay, I will be discussing an article about a woman who starved her two horses. I will address the issue about whether or not the woman’s action was ethical. I will use the two ethical theories of utilitarianism and Kantian ethics to support my argument. I will also suggest a different course of action the woman could have taken to be justified, through both ethical theories.