Moral Philosophies - Essay Example

Moral Philosophies John Stuart Mill clearly expressed his moral theory in his book Utilitarianism written in 1861. In his book, Mill tried to rationalize the Utility Principle or the Greatest Happiness Principle as the basis for ethical standards. Mill tried to explain utilitarianism as involving the various aspects of pleasure including aesthetics, beauty, and enjoyment (4). Utilitarianism has been described as involving all the pleasure that one yearns including the pleasure of the moment. This moral philosophy views life as essentially desiring pleasure. According to the principle, actions are right as long as they encourage happiness as a form of pleasure and they are wrong as long as they discourage happiness. The Greatest Happiness Principle articulates many ideas regarding happiness as pleasure and unhappiness as pain or lack of pleasure. Since this theory establishes that the only thing that is yearned for by an individual is happiness and pleasure, this view of life is often seen as having no greater purpose. This indicates that the only thing which one demands is pleasure thereby disregarding all higher yearnings. However, this notion implies that individuals have no other yearnings apart from pleasure. In reality, things that might satisfy the pleasure of one individual may not satisfy that of the other. Because of this some pleasures are more satisfying than others due to their intrinsically virtuous properties. Mills has describes two forms of pleasure – higher and lower – based on the characteristics of these pleasures (5-6). But what brings about the difference in characteristics? The difference in the quality, according to Mill, results from the preference of one pleasure over the other among people who are aware with the two pleasures (6). Hence, the chosen pleasure is superior to the other one because the preferred pleasure dominates the other one due to a higher quality. Relatively, the preferred pleasure is a higher pleasure because of its higher quality in terms of preference. Due to the quality differences in the numerous forms of pleasures, some pleasures are preferred over the others. Mostly, people who are aware of both higher as well as lower pleasures prefer higher pleasures in their ways of life. Higher pleasures make use of higher faculties which is why any human may not choose to switch to an animal and enjoy animal pleasures. Humans use a higher form of capacity and reasoning and that is why any unhappy human would not replace for a happy and satisfied animal unless the state of unhappiness is so severe that he may want to escape from the situation. Another theory has been presented by Immanuel Kant that relates to the question of morality. According to Kant, all the ethical philosophies are by nature comprehensive, reasonable, and objective hence the categorical is a way by which actions are assessed and they qualify as being comprehensive, rational, and reasonable. The Categorical Imperative provided a path to evaluate our actions and make ethical judgments based on the set criteria. The Categorical Imperative allows an individual to make judgments regarding his or her actions, and how an individual decides which moral principles are going to be applied. Kant described two types of imperatives including categorical and hypothetical, which defines Kant’s view of moral law and what the right action in a particular situation is. The Categorical Imperative applies to all classifications without any exceptions. Since the moral law is an essential obligation therefore according to Kant, it is a Categorical Imperative. That is to say, it is applicable on all moral representatives, times, and places, universally. They are always applicable due to rational reasoning rather than an empirical study. Some actions however are backed up by personal interests or motives which drive an individual to take a particular course of action. The moral worth is guided by a specific motive which decides whether an action is right or wrong. Therefore an act may be in accordance with the moral law however because of involving a personal motive, that act has no moral worth. Kant defined a few formulations for the Categorical Imperative so as to guide an individual about what is the right thing to do. So it tells an individual to act in a way that its maxim or principle becomes the Universal Law. That is, it is essential for an action to be universal. No individual is exceptional so much that different laws apply to different individuals. Hence, when an individual acts from the ethical viewpoint he perceives himself as being equivalent to other individuals. The second formulation describes one’s duties towards humanity as beings. Other people should be used as ends and simply means although it does not imply that people should not be used as means at all. In moral and ethical exchanges the individuals should be acknowledged as independent beings rather than things that have a limited value. The third formulation is related to the first formulation however it further asks whether an individual would want to live in such a society where the maxim is the universal law. The Greatest Happiness Principle calls for greater happiness for the greatest number of people. The Utilitarian theory holds that the results determine whether an action is right or wrong. Thus, it employs a teleological notion whereby actions are derived from outcomes. On the other hand, Kant’s Categorical Imperative says that actions are right or wrong despite its outcomes. As a result, they have intrinsic value rather than instrumental value. The second formulation also talks about the two forms of beings: persons and things, which have intrinsic value. Because of this Categorical Imperative is deontological that is it involves duties as a basis for categorical maxims. Mill’s Greatest Happiness Theory is essentially consequentialist. That is, the quality of the moral action depends upon results or consequences. This principle implies that the only thing which people desire is pleasure and happiness. To increase happiness among the greatest number of people is moral. Mill had divided pleasures according to their differences in quality which make an individual happy. In order to please the greatest number of people, however, the happiness of the minority is compromised. According to Kant’s theory, one must act in a way that the moral principle becomes the universal law and that beings should not be simply treated as means. This is because in doing so an individual will be disrespecting their autonomy. The Utilitarian moral philosophy or the Greatest Happiness Principle appeals to me the most due to its consequentialist nature. Its notion that actions are right or wrong on the basis of its consequences seems practical because it maximizes happiness and pleasure. I believe one’s actions are judged by its results rather than any universal law. Also, human beings by nature demand for pleasure and actions which lead to happiness are those that satisfy an individual physically as well as spiritually. Although the Utilitarian theory implies that the rights of some individuals may be compromised the majority do acquire happiness. Also, Mill’s moral philosophy deals with the community at large rather than just individualist. The Categorical Imperative deals with individual autonomy by treating one as an end and not entirely as a means which may inhibit one’s happiness. In the end, the most attractive is the Greatest Happiness Theory because it considers the benefit of the people at large by maximizing the happiness for the greatest number of people. Categorical Imperative however mentions one’s duties as being universally acceptable so as to be moral. Not everything that is universally acceptable may be morally right which is why Kant’s theory is not always suitable. Works Cited Mill, John Stuart. "Utilitarianism." Early Modern Texts. Jonathan F. Bennett, 2008. Web. 26 Oct. 2013. . Read More