Deontology Vs Utilitarianism

The sense of right or wrong varies with the mindset in which one perceives the action. Two schools of thought in philosophy that deal with this issue are Utilitarianism and Deontology. The judgement of what constitutes a moral action is stated in different respects. Utilitarianism is based on the principle that “an action is right if it maximizes pleasure and minimizes pain for the greatest number of people.” The polar opposite, deontology, is principled on the “accordance from duty.” In regards to the idea of treating people as a means to an end, Utilitarianism is simply awful and inhumane. It disregards concepts that makes us human like emotions. Kantianism is better at moral dilemmas but it is not perfect. This ideology has its flaws that …show more content…
Talking about Kant’s philosophical ideas is both straightforward and comprehensively complex. Kant utilizes the rational capabilities that humans (rational beings) have to determine whether an action is morally right or wrong. This is a bit vague but Kant has established the following concepts: Reason, Inclination, and Will. Reason supplies the moral law, objective truth. Inclination are the animalistic behaviors that sometimes we are prone to, and although we have this quality within us, it is not necessarily bad as long it does not conflict with reason. Lastly, Will is called the “depot” of action. It is the direct of the agent (rational being i.e. humans) towards an action. According to Kant Good Will follows reason while Bad Will follows Inclination. In regards to Will, Kant has stated the following: “there is no possibility of thinking of anything at all in the world, or even out of it, which can be regarded as good without qualification, except a good will” (Kant 7). To Kant a Good will is in itself nothing can be a judge to such concept. Duty is a fundamental concept in which leads the agents we ought to do. The idea of duty integrates the concept of will and reason. This concept connects reason in which it produces moral laws thus it is an obligation (maxim) for the will to do so and from the will the maxim is the principle it goes by. To determine if a maxim is …show more content…
The first principle discusses that if we are going to initiate a moral rule it will have to become a maxim and this maxim will have to be universalized. A maxim is a potential moral law and universalization is taking such law to which everyone commits the act. To see if a maxim is permissible it will have to pass the tests within the categorical imperative. The first test is contradiction in conception and the second is contradiction in will. Contradiction in conception implies that with a given maxim does it collapse within itself from denotation contradiction. An example from class is committing suicide. A maxim in which committing suicide promotes self-love by ending one’s life is complete absurd (this contradiction will imply to a perfect duty of not committing suicide). Contradiction in will implies an exception rule. If an exception is found then it logically cannot (a contradiction of will infers to imperfect duty) be applicable to everyone then. A perfect duty is a duty that fails contradiction in conception which basically implies that these duties ought not to be done for example committing suicide it is basically forbidden. An imperfect duty is a duty that failed contradiction in will but this idea is based on subjective preferences. At times one may or may not do the maxim for example helping

Show More

Notes On Business Ethics

Personal Liberty Vs. Social Responsibility

Ethics Midterm Notes

Philosophy Final Review Essay

Midterm Study Guide Essay

Philosophy 241 Lecture Note Essay

Final Exam Essay

Tiger Woods Essay

Abortion Paper

LEG 500 Essay