Deontology Vs Utilitarianism Essay

What is Morally Acceptable: Deontology vs. Utilitarianism
What is considered the right way of doing things? What is the wrong way? These questions are hard to answer. However, two schools of thought have been working to answer these very questions. John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant each have come up with their own way of answering these questions. Kant believes in Deontology, or the thought of serving your duty. Mill believes that Utilitarianism is the answer, or what ever brings the most happiness to the most amounts of people is what is considered good. Through out this paper I will be providing input from each side a scenario where your family is in danger and you have the potential to remove that danger, but with fatal consequences. You are at home one evening with your family, when all of a sudden, a man throws open the door. He’s holding a shotgun in his …show more content…
Which action is morally acceptable? Kant uses his categorical imperative to make such decisions. It says, “Act as though the maxim your action were to become, through your will, a universal law of nature” (Kant). Meaning the action we are choosing to do, everyone, everywhere would do as well. He also says that humans “exist as an end in himself and not merely as a means to be used by this or that will at its discretion” (Kant). Meaning, all humans need to be treated as humans and with respect. Kant also mentions a kingdom of ends. Meaning everyone has the duty of following the rules. Based on his teachings and theories, Kant would tell you not to get the pistol to kill the intruder. Kant would argue that our duty to follow the law of not killing over powers the fact that killing him might save your family. Kant would also argue that your self interests, and happiness does not come before the fact that treating others as humans and with respect is also your duty and killing a human violates that duty. Therefore, making the action of saving your family