Mill Utilitarianism

1393 Words 6 Pages
Bernard Williams, co-author of Utilitarianism: For and Against, presents a powerful and constant critique on utilitarian ideals, assumptions and arguments. He finds that the poor theory of action stated by utilitarianism, fails to interact with the real problems of moral and political philosophy at a crucial level that is needed. As well as, fails to make sense of notions such as integrity, or even human happiness itself. Considering what John Stuart Mill presented in his essay regarding utilitarianism, Mills would instruct Jim to do what would cause the ‘most amount of happiness’. Since the majority of the protesters is crying out to kill one to save the rest, Mill would suggest that, “that action are morally right only if and because they …show more content…
Mill, who ultimately gives an answer, Kant considers the opposite regarding a situation like this. In Immanuel Kant’s book, Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant “does not aim to tell you what you should do or how to lead your life” (Yount, Kant, Conscience, and Duty). Kant feels as though one should already know or have said knowledge to begin with. In saying this, Kant believes “that without a good will one can’t even be worthy of being happy” (Kant). The only thing in the world that is absolutely good is the idea of good will, such as the qualities of good fortune or qualities of spirit may be used for good or bad purposes in a person’s life. By contrast, a good will is essentially ‘good’, even if it may fail to bring about positive results. According to Kant, “whenever you act for a reason […], the reason must be necessitate your act if it is to motivate and explain your act” (Yount, Kant, Conscience, and Duty). In this situation, Kant would ask Jim what his motivating principle might be and is he doing this for ‘good’? The main purposes of each individual are assumed to be the fulfillment of happiness and self-preservation. Indeed, people are often less happy than the masses with a precise space for a reason. As a result, the common people look at reason with contempt, while the refined people are often jealous of the masses. The fact is that reason serves to provide purposes that are higher than individual happiness and survival. The reason 's function is to bring out a will that is good within itself as opposed to good for any specific purpose, such as the fulfillment of happiness. The motivating principle or the maxim in this situation would be saving the lives of these prisoners. Typically, it means that the moral worth of your action lies in your motive for choosing and acting on that maxim, which could possibly be the prisoners’ lives. “Kant contends to be morally motivated is to be motivated simple by Practical Reason” (Yount,

Related Documents