Utilitarianism:Kant, Mill, Bentham
If life were one big dartboard, with happiness the bulls-eye, then morality would be the feathers on the dart that we shoot. This analogy, if it were known in the 1700's and 1800's, would not only have spared Bentham and Mill a lot of time, but spared the world a lot of trees. For them, happiness in life is only a dart throw away.....Hit the bulls-eye, you win.....Let's play again..... "But enough of metaphor and declamation: it is not by such means that moral science is to be improved." (Bentham p.527) Teleology, simple as it may be, is not quite as simple as merely aiming for happiness and hoping for the best. Deontology is even less simple, with the motives behind the action bearing greater importance than the action itself. Striving for happiness and being a morally praiseworthy person at the same time is a continuous game of give and take, with the outcome entirely dependent on which viewpoint (Kantian, Utilitarian) is held. Together, we will explore these principles eve!Kantianism and Utilitarianism differ greatly in their approach to individual actions and their respective outcomes. Here, we will look at two separate viewpoints, the Teleological approach and the Deontological approach. In Deontology,
How do we decide what makes a person morally praiseworthy? In Kantian terms, a person's actions can be deemed morally praiseworthy only by analyzing the motives behind those actions. This means that one's actions must: 1. Adhere strictly to duty, 2. Have unconditional respect for the duty itself, and 3. Not be derived from inclination in any way. Once again, the Categorical Imperative comes into play. By following one's duties derived from the universal laws within the Categorical Imperative, one can grasp what it takes to be morally praiseworthy. There are a few holes in Kantian theories that remain unanswered. For instance, one universal law could be "love thy neighbor". The question remains as to what extent should we "love our neighbors". In the late 1700's, while Kant walked the earth, this maxim could be possible, however with the advent of technology now available to us, every person on the planet, essentially, is our neighbor. So, are these universal laws to ! In summary, the differences between Kantianism and Utilitarianism can be quite vast. The most notable of these differences is their approach to the acquisition of happiness and how one can be morally praiseworthy. Bentham and Mill, being of the teleological point of view, agree that the action that promotes the most happiness overall is deemed the most desirable. Kant, on the other hand, being of the Deontological viewpoint, is not so much concerned with the degree of happiness that is obtained, rather that it is the motive behind and action that is ultimately important. With the world changing so rapidly, so does duty and the places duty is derived from. The question needs to be asked if either of the disciplines, Teleology and Deontology, are truly desirable and applicable to modern life. "No man is an island...entire of itself," hence we form our standpoints solely on the world around us. We can use thinkers from the past such as Kant, Bentham and Mill, as a platform ! experience ("a priori"). To Ka
Some common words found in the essay are:
Categorical Imperative, According Kant, Bentham Mill, Teleology Deontology, Kantianism Utilitarianism, Principle Utility, Rule Utilitarianism, Bentham Mill's, Mill Teleology, , morally praiseworthy, categorical imperative, bentham mill, universal rule, universal law, takes morally praiseworthy, deemed desirable, teleological approach, action ultimately, kantianism utilitarianism, teleology deontology, happiness overall deemed, motive action ultimately, action promotes happiness, promotes happiness overall,
Approximate Word count = 1349
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
