Utilitarianism Vs. Kant Analysis

Improved Essays
Moral Sphere
Nowadays, is very common to see those brutal videos on the internet in which people are mistering kids or animals. For sure you have wonder what those kind of people think. Is it morally acceptable to treat that way a person or an animal? Maybe at some point you wonder if animal have rights. In this paper we would seek to answer those question by exploring two ideologies of moral community. In this philosophy paper, we will discuss, compare and contrast utilitarianism’s and Kant’s respective theories on what characteristics make one a member of the moral community.
First of all, in order to compare and contrast Utilitarianism’s and Kant’s ideology regardless of what make one a member of the moral community we must know some background
…show more content…
Likewise, by not having the capacity of suffering make inanimate objects unimportant, since we grant such importance. Utilitarians agreed that species membership is morally irrelevant. (2014 The Fundaments of Ethics, p.131) In other word, this means that moral community do not requires to be part of a specific specie in order to be part of it. Some utilitarian have developed an important and controversial argument called The Argument from Marginal Cases. This argument establishes that it is immoral to kill, harm and eat marginal human beings. Since, for utilitarian’s marginal human beings and animals have equal importance, we must treat them equally. (2014 The Fundaments of Ethics, p.132) In other words, we must not do any action against animals that we would not do to a marginal human being. On the other hand, we have Kant’s ideology. Indeed, Kant thought that rationality and autonomy is what make one member of the moral sphere. It is important to keep in mind that for Kant rationality and autonomy support the dignity of a human being. Being rational literally means being able to use our reason to guide us on our achievement of goals in a moral way. (2014 The Fundaments of Ethics, p.175) Being autonomous is have the capacity to take …show more content…
Indeed, both ideologies differ in who is part of the moral community and how they gain the moral status. First of all, Kant’s view establishes that in order to someone forms part of a moral community have to be autonomous and rational. Kant’s theory excludes infants, animals, sever mentally ill and mentally retarded. In the other hand, utilitarians use as a guideline the slogan of Jeremy Bentham. They think that if a being is capable to suffer, they gain the entry to the moral community. In this view animals and human being (included marginal human being) have the equal right to be part of the moral sphere. It is not new that this two ideologies differ one of another. We must take in account that Kant disagree with other important consequentialist claims. To conclude, this paper had the purpose of discuss, compare and contrast utilitarianism’s and Kant’s respective theories. Such theories consist on the characteristics one must have in order to be a member of the moral community. We conclude that for Kant’s view one must have autonomy and be rational. Also, we study the utilitarianism view in which one is member of the moral sphere if is capable to

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    In Ben’s circumstances, and circumstances of similar nature, if he were to act according to Kantian ethics, his approach would begin with carrying out the action that is aligned with a good-will and a moral duty to act. To Kantian ethics, human rationality and the development of the good-will are of central importance. Kant believed that since humans have the ability to reason, they must use their rationale to recognize the demands of reason, “for reason recognizes the establishment of a good will as its highest practical destination” (Marino 194). For Kant, it’s not the consequences of the actions that truly matter, but the motivation of doing them out of a good-will. The only genuinely good actions are the actions done exclusively out of respect for the moral rules.…

    • 905 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    As we have seen Kant call maxims to actions product of reason. Maxims are thoughts that can motivate individuals on how to act. Since for Kant, moral rules are absolute he sets two test for morally acceptable actions. The first test is known as Principle of Universalizability. This test states that an act is morally acceptable if and only if its maxim is universal.…

    • 1012 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The morality can be determined prior to the action. 2. Categorical imperative as used in Kant’s ethical theory is the tool which tries to eliminate the use of self-interest in deriving what we perceive to be moral. According to the categorical imperative, only actions which are done in fulfillment of duty are regarded to be moral but not action done from the motive of self-interest. From his view, any action done from self-interest are taken to be prudent rather than moral.…

    • 1177 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Kant's Obligation Analysis

    • 1936 Words
    • 8 Pages

    For Kant, the categorical imperative serves as a decision procedure to determine if one’s action is morally right. To use the categorical imperative, one must first identify the maxim of one’s action. Second, one must universalize that maxim, and finally, one must then look for a contradiction between the two. If there is a contradiction, then there is a moral duty against acting on the supposed…

    • 1936 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Kant presented a universal and impartial moral code called the categorical imperative. The categorical imperative is meant to help us make moral decisions. However, it discounts moral emotions such as compassion and sympathy as appropriate and ethical…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Introduction In this paper, I will explain the birth of Kant’s moral theory (Kant). Then I will introduce the idea that such a theory suggests individuals are often morally obligated to help others, regardless of whether doing so serves a self-interest or not. From there, I will go ahead and prove the argument by way of both the universal law formulation and the humanity formulation, which are two elements of Kant’s Categorical Imperative procedure, used to test rules of morality. Finally, I will build a contrasting image of Kant’s moral theory to John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarian moral theory, through the use of examples (Mill). Exposition Firstly, it is important to know that Kant built his entire moral theory based on the premise that not…

    • 1417 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Free In Morality

    • 1218 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Morality and responsibility are two complementary concepts, one is the obligatory result of the other. Human beings engage in acts of moral code from one side and non-moral rules from the other side in social life. The basic questions of philosophy are, Is there a purpose of moral action? And Is man free in moral actions?. By the end of this essay, I`m hoping to show that human beings are responsible for their actions and also moral actions by proving how free-will and determinism works in this concept.…

    • 1218 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Moral Reasoning Case Study

    • 1035 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Even though Mill says that these decisions should be rational, they still take into mind how others feel. Kant says that all moral problems can be handled by applying an impartial, pure, rational principle to a particular case. Individuals can gain moral understanding by instructing people on how to pursue particular objectives most rationally. Immanuel Kant created the categorical imperative which is based upon the idea that morality is derived from rationality and all moral judgements are logically supported. Kant argues that this is the standard of rationality, and it is how we can gain moral understanding.…

    • 1035 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    His theory of value is based upon the idea of good will and that nothing else is good besides good will without some form of qualification. Kant’s theory of right action is in belief that we have a duty to act in respect for the “moral flow” which can also be known as the categorical imperative. The second formulation of the categorical imperative is crucial to understanding his theory of right action and value. As humans, it is said that we have inherent value that excludes us from being used as means to an end. Being used as a means to an end can be described in modern terms as to be “used” meaning that one person would take advantage of another for personal again to whatever the said “end” or goal may be.…

    • 1728 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Rationality meaning one 's judge of values and one 's guide to action.“Settle, for sure and universally, what conduct will promote the happiness of a rational being.”( Kant) Kant first starts by arguing that we are indeed responsible for what we do. The actions that we take are not just a set of events that we have no control over. Other philosophers believe that they are just another set of events that are determined by the things we cannot control. He also bases morality as a matter of duty that is common sense. Whether we feel against or not we know the morally right thing and it’s our duty to care out our action.…

    • 881 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays