Introduction
Deontology and Utilitarianism are ethical theories that classify what a moral action is and what makes that action moral. Using these theories, one can be assisted in deciding whether they are committing moral or immoral actions. Looking at Absolute poverty in third world countries, it is hard to determine whether we have a moral obligation to help lessen the suffering occurring there. However, by using the two ethical theories given by Mill and Kant as aids, it is clear that people from industrialized countries are morally obligated to help lessen the pain and suffering caused by absolute poverty.
Kant’s View Deontology is an ethical theory created by Kant. This theory concentrates on duty and good will (Kant). An act that brings you pleasure or joy is not a moral act except if it is in adjunct to good will. Kant believes that the only thing in this world that is good without qualification is good will. Because good will is intrinsically good, any act motivated by this is considered moral regardless of the outcome. Furthermore, for an act to be considered moral it must be done from duty and not from emotional inclinations. Kant believed that …show more content…
However, I agree more with Mill’s views than Kant’s, because I think emotions can play a big part in morality. Being emotionally inclined to help those in need is a good thing. It would be wrong if someone was not emotionally inclined to help others. I believe that if someone donates money to lessen pain and suffering because they feel sympathy towards the poverty-stricken, it should be considered a moral act. In conclusion, I believe that we are morally obligated to give to the people living in absolute poverty because if we don’t then pain and suffering will only get worse throughout time. There will be overall more pain and suffering than happiness and pleasure. Turning a blind eye to absolute poverty is
Deontology and Utilitarianism are ethical theories that classify what a moral action is and what makes that action moral. Using these theories, one can be assisted in deciding whether they are committing moral or immoral actions. Looking at Absolute poverty in third world countries, it is hard to determine whether we have a moral obligation to help lessen the suffering occurring there. However, by using the two ethical theories given by Mill and Kant as aids, it is clear that people from industrialized countries are morally obligated to help lessen the pain and suffering caused by absolute poverty.
Kant’s View Deontology is an ethical theory created by Kant. This theory concentrates on duty and good will (Kant). An act that brings you pleasure or joy is not a moral act except if it is in adjunct to good will. Kant believes that the only thing in this world that is good without qualification is good will. Because good will is intrinsically good, any act motivated by this is considered moral regardless of the outcome. Furthermore, for an act to be considered moral it must be done from duty and not from emotional inclinations. Kant believed that …show more content…
However, I agree more with Mill’s views than Kant’s, because I think emotions can play a big part in morality. Being emotionally inclined to help those in need is a good thing. It would be wrong if someone was not emotionally inclined to help others. I believe that if someone donates money to lessen pain and suffering because they feel sympathy towards the poverty-stricken, it should be considered a moral act. In conclusion, I believe that we are morally obligated to give to the people living in absolute poverty because if we don’t then pain and suffering will only get worse throughout time. There will be overall more pain and suffering than happiness and pleasure. Turning a blind eye to absolute poverty is