Essay on Kantian Theory vs Golden Rule
The Kantian theory is one which emphasizes on suppressing personal inclinations and performing one's duty unless one is either not a free agent or has no duty, even proposing several formulations to determine one's duty, allowing it to solve problems other theories face. Unlike other moral guides, it takes motives into account when judging one's morality. The Golden Rule, also known as the ethic of reciprocity, is a general principle of ethics which requires one to treat others as they themselves would want to be treated when in the same situation. As both of the theories are …show more content…
Lastly in the case of a judge sentencing a murderer, Golden Rule would require the judge to free the convict as he would not want to be hanged. Kantian theory would require the judge to sentence the murderer as he has a duty to protect the people. As can be seen, the Golden Rule does not consider that we may be forced to impose actions on people contrary to their wishes and hence it has a weakness Kantian theory accounts for.
Kantian theory is not perfect, however, and it also shares common weaknesses with Golden Rule, as one may still end up in a moral dilemma when there are conflicting wants or duties like the "Bomb Dilemma".
In conclusion, I believe that Kantian theory is a stronger guide for moral actions compared to the Golden Rule as it can overcome many of the weaknesses the Golden Rule has. It also covers more situations, making it a more comprehensive