John Rawls
According to Immanuel Kant consequences do not matter, as opposed to utilitarianism in which consequences matter. The Kantian view focuses on the motivation for performing an act with total disregard for the consequences. In opposition to this view, utilitarianism makes ethical decisions about an act based the consequences that the action will bring. For a person who uses the Kantian theory, they believe that the only pure good is human reason without any regard to the consequences. This human reason as discussed by Kant should be without influence of emotions or desires. As opposed to the utilitarian view, that states that the motives of an action are not important, just the consequences. A purely good act, as defined by Kant?s theory would be performed because of obligation to the categorical imperative. However, according to utilitarianism a good ethical decision is measured by the amount of happiness that the act creates. This basic difference between Kant and John Stuart Mill?s utilitarianism can also be demonstrated in terms of deontological vs. teleological ethics. Teleological ethics, which focuses on the end results of an action, can be criticized because it fails
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
According Kant, Kant Principle, Immanuel Kant, Stuart Mill, Stuart Mills, Kants Theory, Kant Mill, According Kantian, categorical imperative, Burruel Phil, consequences matter, act utilitarianism, universal law, categorical imperative test, pass categorical, difference kant, teleological ethics, sense experience, according kant, pass categorical imperative, imperative test, John Stuart, imperative universal law, categorical imperative universal, actions accordance duty,
Approximate Word count = 1526
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
 |
