Download file to see previous pages...
Kant’s philosophy fundamentally revolves around the deontological ethics. He has presented a philosophy regarding the duty, or moral obligation of an individual. According to Kant, an act can be deemed as appropriate and right if the individual originally did the act considering it as his/her moral obligation. In view of Kant, it is just nothing else but duty that can entitle an act as right (Schwartz). Kant thinks that duty essentially makes the actions morally sound and justified as compared to their maxims. However, maxims can also be right provided that it is possible to universalize them. Unlike Kant, Mill’s visualization of the concept of moral philosophy is fundamentally teleological. He believes in the consequences of actions. As long as they are good, every action is justified. Mill does not pay any regard to the will or intention behind committing an act. To Mill, it is the act’s consequence that matters at the end of the day. Mill says that an act is right as long as it gives rise to pleasure or relieves pain. Unlike Kant, Mill’s visualization of the concept of moral philosophy is fundamentally teleological. He believes in the consequences of actions. As long as they are good, every action is justified. Mill does not pay any regard to the will or intention behind committing an act. To Mill, it is the act’s consequence that matters at the end of the day. Mill says that an act is right as long as it gives rise to pleasure or relieves pain.
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Referring to it as the principle of utility, Mill believes that the highest normative principle is that actions are moral as they tend to promote happiness and immoral as they tend to produce sadness or dissatisfaction. Although Mill was a utilitarian, he argued that not all forms of pleasure are of equal value, using his famous saying "It is better to be Socrates dissatisfied, than a fool satisfied." In this regard, John Stuart Mill rejects the classical virtue theory.
In the modern global context it is very important to be aware of philosophical ideas of the leading philosophers. Many ideas of famous philosophers are the basic for many modern scholars’ theories. Different analyses are made through the prism of these ideas.
This is an ethics issue. First we have to define how these three philosophers look at ethics and morals. The three of them have different views on ethics, especially metaethics. For Nietzsche, moral values are arbitrary; while for Kant and Mill, morals are innate.
According to John Stuart Mill, the fundamental principle of morality refers to the principle of utility, or Greatest Happiness Principle, which asserts that individuals tend to act in a manner that is most likely to derive maximum pleasure, satisfaction, and happiness to a wide range of people.
Thus Kant ventures into a study that tries to supply the principles of moral action as such, or tries to supply the principles for "rational beings in general," which we can interpret in this context as moral subjects. One can found the same tension in Kant's ethical writings.
In the United States under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, the owner of the appropriated land is entitled to a reasonable compensation or the fair market value for the property. The government is supposed to
The first one makes says that people at all time must act appropriately and the second rules promotes the value of respect and says that well being of all individuals is important and therefore, one should not use others for their own
For example, in the modern world, should morality be influenced by actions that take into consideration the greatest number of people affected; or should the rationale of morality focus on logic and other personal
8 Pages(2000 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Kant vs Mill for FREE!