Virtue Ethics, Utilitarianism, And Kant's Deontological Ethics

Improved Essays
There are three substantial ethical theories in philosophy. Each attempting to prove the others wrong. These theories include: Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics, Mill’s Utilitarianism, and Kant’s Deontological Ethics. In their theories, each thought they had found the answer to finding the truth. Each theory has a hole in it that made others speculate it’s truth. I believe every theory brings an important piece to the puzzle. One theory alone cannot bring the truth. In this paper I will argue that one must take some truth from each theory in order to help find the ultimate truth.
Aristotle’s theory is based on virtues. He begins his argument by talking about the human good. To put it simply, he believed that one must have reasons to achieve a goal
…show more content…
It states that “actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” Right away one can see that Mill has very different views than Aristotle. Mill believes that happiness is about pleasure while Aristotle believed it has about the ends that one makes in their lifetime. Mill also believed that morality is about promoting happiness for all while Aristotle is only concerned with the happiness of the beholder. An important piece for Mill’s argument is that of quantity versus quality. In class we discussed being a pig with all the pleasure in the world and being a human with not as much pleasure. The argument breaks down to the quantity of pleasures. As a pig you can have all the pleasures in the world and as a human you can still have pleasures but not nearly as extensive as the pig. Then the argument breaks down to quality. The quality of a pig 's life would be boring. A pig eat, sleeps, and maybe plays in its everyday life. For a human we can experience different activities in our everyday life. Mill sums up this argument by saying, “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.” While Mill has a sound argument, there are many objections to his beliefs. The first objection of this argument would be people doing without …show more content…
Kant rejects the idea of virtues because he believes they cannot bring goodness by themselves. He also believes that happiness as an ultimate end in Mill’s argument is a total waste because there would be no need for reason. He forms his own argument around the basis of morality. Kant believes that the purpose of reason is to produce a good will which is good in itself. He then goes on to describe deontology. Deontology is what is right based on one’s duty or obligation. He then goes on to detail what the basis for morality is not. I believe this is important because it is often seen that philosophers give their side and then do not tell you what it is not. Kant draws the conclusion that one should pick their ends and then chose their means, this is not the basis of morality. If one cannot choose their own end then they must rely on the categorical imperatives. Categorical imperatives have no specific goals and just what to do the right thing. In all, Kant believes that one should not pursue morality by looking first at particular examples and then deriving a theory

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Moral rightness, or ethics is a branch of philosophy that studies and determines what is right and what is wrong. Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy that studies reality in the universe. The question of whether or not an act has to be universally right entails the knowledge of both studies, and in order to answer it you must know the difference between right and wrong, and the reality of what people should do in circumstances, if there is one. According to Kant, metaphysics is intuition-based as well as based on synthetic a priori judgements. This means that the truth of what is right or wrong is strictly undetermined by external stimuli, predispositions, or emotions during the situation.…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    According to David Hume, morality is something that is unable to be created via reason alone. Primarily since because ideologies are incapable of motivating us enough to act. As result, according to Hume, morality comes from emotions. Our emotions make the judgment on what is right or wrong, and that leads us to approve or disapprove of the act. We may reason why exactly or the many different scenarios where an action or duty may appear moral at first glance, what W.D.…

    • 1013 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Name: Course: Title: Date: KANT’S GROUNDING FOR THE METAPHYSICS OF MORALS 1. Deontology is the view of the act to be moral or not moral from the action done. In deontology, the consequences that an action may impact to individuals are not considered but rather, the logic behind the action is determined. Consequences should not be used to justify the good in any action, “a good will is not good because of what it effects or accomplishes” (Ross 33). Such action should arise from the duty, and law assigned to individuals by a system but not out of self-interest or the consequences.…

    • 1177 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    To Kant, the proprietors of self love make a category mistake by basing their viewpoint on empirical psychology; happiness is contingent and therefore are not capable of being commandments of reason (Kant 329). Imposing empirical principles for morality is dangerous because the unconditional purity of the prescription is ruined; the will can no longer behave autonomously (Kant 340). This is because reason is a priori and necessary. For Kant, the idea of an a priori power of reason that determines the will precedes all contingent, empirical factors; this will must apply to all possible rational beings (324). The psychology of human beings is irrelevant in the question of the existence of a morality based off of…

    • 775 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This is why Kant thinks you cannot measure the morality of an action by its outcome. He believed that the good intentions we have to execute an action is what really matters. In his theory he stated that we should treat…

    • 3463 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Nietzsche condemned sound rationalists like Kant for their objectivism. He was a relativist and expressed that nothing could be known with assurance. He did not accept that supreme truth, from the earlier learning, interminable thoughts or extreme reality which was focal ideas for the Kant 's teachings have ever existed. Nietzsche did not have faith in Kant 's Categorical Imperative (Foundation of Morals) thinking of them as simple reflections. He considered the time spend on looking for the endless truth a unimportant exercise in futility as it led individuals far from the most imperative thing which reality.…

    • 1016 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Theories Of Virtue Ethics

    • 1225 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Utilitarian ethics differ from deontological ethics as it claims that morality is based on the degree of happiness that an action produces while ignoring the quality of the action used to create said happiness. According to deontological ethics, not every action that has positive results can be perceived as good or right if it does not adhere to the stipulated rules and principles of ethical behavior. This is because, an action cannot be deemed good if it is wrong in the first…

    • 1225 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    It seems that to be moral in the Kantian sense, one must be going against their own desires. In the aforementioned case, this is the point of contention between Barry and Harry. In fact, in the Kantian sense, it would seem contradictory for one to gain satisfaction from being moral because then one would be pursuing morality for a desire rather than a sense of duty. In this way, it seems that Kantian morality is treated as a burden rather than an enjoyable endeavor. In the end, I think this gap leaves one question that goes unanswered by Kant’s approach: why should man behave in a moral…

    • 1283 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    These are the actions in which someone is acting on antecedent factors and experience. In my worldview, humans seem to only ever act on experience. However, with Kant’s idea of the noumenal world and the rational decisions he attempts to save moral freedom. The idea that someone makes a decision not based on experience or prior factors is a hard pill to swallow. The noumenal world is a theoretical construct that Kant introduces to save us from a deterministic worldview in which everything is determined by causality.…

    • 1774 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The rightness or wrongness of actions does not depend on their consequences, but on whether the moral reason is “from duty”. Actions done “in conformity with duty” or out of self-interest, have no moral worth to Kant. Duty is defined as an individual’s rational understanding of the action their pursuing. This relates to an action’s maxim, which is what you’re doing and why you’re doing it. Two main principles are used to further Kant’s theory, one being the principle of universalizability.…

    • 1103 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays