A fundamental idea behind Kantian ethics is that every human being has intrinsic value. Further more each human adopts self-governance and the intelligence to act in accord with moral virtues. The culmination of moral ethos to which all actions, duties, and piety amass is a categorical imperative, or an absolute precept. Kant’s use of the categorical imperative is connected to utilitarianism and principles taught by Christ in the New Testament by delineating correct methods of making moral decisions. Kant’s arguments of acting in accord to our maxim ties closely to some of Christ’s recorded teachings, yet at the same time his views that correct ends are reached a priori which guides moral action while John Stuart Mill contends that the best
…show more content…
It is a simple theory in which he states “Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” (Mill, 7) It is easy to relate to when an elementary recognition of pursuing pleasure and avoiding unhappiness and pain. In stark contrast to Kant’s absolutes and rigid adherence to the highest of laws, Utilitarianism or the greatest-happiness principle is defines right or wrong by the consequences of actions. Due to its base nature of simplicity it is attacked by Kantian theology describing it as “doctrine worthy only of swine.” (Mill, 7) Argument is made that although there are base animal appetites that obtain a primitive form of happiness that there are also pleasures of higher quality, such as intellectual endeavors. John Stuart Mill does play a course similar to that of Kant by acknowledging that there are basic moral values that bring more happiness, such as outlined in the New Testament. In Mills writings there is an honest belief that if we follow our instinct to seek happiness, even if it is necessary to overcome unseemly tasks for the greater good, that if an individual happiness is good for that person, and therefore if there is a general happiness there is a good as a
It is a simple theory in which he states “Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” (Mill, 7) It is easy to relate to when an elementary recognition of pursuing pleasure and avoiding unhappiness and pain. In stark contrast to Kant’s absolutes and rigid adherence to the highest of laws, Utilitarianism or the greatest-happiness principle is defines right or wrong by the consequences of actions. Due to its base nature of simplicity it is attacked by Kantian theology describing it as “doctrine worthy only of swine.” (Mill, 7) Argument is made that although there are base animal appetites that obtain a primitive form of happiness that there are also pleasures of higher quality, such as intellectual endeavors. John Stuart Mill does play a course similar to that of Kant by acknowledging that there are basic moral values that bring more happiness, such as outlined in the New Testament. In Mills writings there is an honest belief that if we follow our instinct to seek happiness, even if it is necessary to overcome unseemly tasks for the greater good, that if an individual happiness is good for that person, and therefore if there is a general happiness there is a good as a