Monday, December 2, 2019
Kant And Mill Theories Essays - Philosophy, Ethics,
  Kant And Mill Theories    The categorical imperative is a better guide for moral reasoning because it can  be applied by the individual with a clear, understandable reverence for the  morality of the whole community. Mill's utilitarianism is also concerned with  the whole, but the mechanism by which one can judge the worth of his or her  actions is quite a leap. When a utilitarian makes a moral decision about an  action the primary concern is individual happiness. The agent must then consider  the consequences of this action within the extent of his or her influence. While  there is little argument we all want to be happy, we can not assess the moral  worth of our actions on consequence. It is much too difficult to assimilate  individual actions and consequences with the welfare of humanity as a whole.    Conversely, Kant's categorical imperative gives an individual a more reliable  mechanism by which to judge his actions. The test begins with intentions rather  than consequences. It is easier to assess intentions than consequences, because  intentions are not as specific to situation and reliant upon outcome. Instead,  good intentions are simple moral intuitions that tend to produce good. If the  whole of humanity shares good intentions, acting only upon those intentions  which the individual would will for everyone produces the greatest good.    
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.