Kant's Moral Theory Essay

Kant’s moral theory is based on the fact that one’s action should be governed by a maxim that follows the purity of the will; the idea that one’s actions should be based on a will that aligns with duty and not on the consequences of one’s actions. In the contrary, rule utilitarianism is based on the consequences of one’s actions and how it impacts the overall happiness of the individuals involved. The following paper focuses on the ideas of duty ethics and utilitarian ethics; and how these ideas can be implemented in the case of James Liang. Kant believes that an act is morally acceptable when such an act perfectly aligns with one’s duty. Furthermore, he believed that all rational beings are obligated by the demands of duty. Kant imposes the idea of the “purity of the will” which expands on the principle that one should act …show more content…
A maxim is a “subjective principle that governs action”; a maxim is a rational individual’s actions that are justified with accordance to one’s duty. However, one’s maxim can be tested through categorical imperative which is how one’s maxim is moved from application to an individual to being universally applicable. Furthermore, the categorical imperative is applicable to all rational agents and disobeying its application is contrary to reason and to Kant’s theory is considered morally wrong. In contrast to Kant’s moral theory, rule utilitarianism states that an act is determined to be morally right on wrong based on its consequences. Also, generally speaking, an act based on utilitarianism should bring about the most happiness out of all other alternative acts. Specifically, rule utilitarianism brings about the idea that one should act according to a set of rules that would lead to the most optimal consequences and is deemed by a majority to be acceptable. In contrary, Kant believed that one’s actions should be based on the purity of the will and not based on consequences at