Essay on Kantian Absolutism And Utilitarianism Vs. Utilitarianism

920 Words Dec 1st, 2016 4 Pages
The most recent Presidential election in the United States recently came to a wrap, widely being considered one of the most ridiculous elections of all time. When it was announced that the two Presidential finalists were Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, people all around the world were shocked. With Donald Trump having no experience in politics, and Hillary Clinton previously having been in a political position, but landing herself in hot water for deleting thousands of emails, it seemed that America was almost certainly doomed. With the controversial nature of the candidates, many America citizens decided to remove themselves from the equation completely by not voting at all. If I was an American citizen, I would have done the same thing. The decision to not vote, while still reserving the right to do so, might be frowned upon. Kantian Absolutism and Utilitarianism are two moral theories that will be put to the test in determining whether or not voting should be a moral obligation. I will try to argue that it should not be an obligation to cast a ballot in a presidential election, with the support of the two theories listed above. For starters, let’s talk about Utilitarianism. From what I understand, Utilitarianism is the idea to act in ways that promote the most happiness, and the least unhappiness. Utilitarian’s believe that we are allowed, if not required, to take all steps necessary to promote overall happiness. With that being said, no one person is more important…

Related Documents