Utilitarianism V. Kantianism

Ethics can be defined as the conscious criticism on our moral beliefs with the aim of improving, extending or civilisation those beliefs in some way. (Dodds, Lecture 2) Kantian moral surmise and Utilitarianism be two theories that attempt to answer the ethical someoneality of kind-hearted beings. This paper pull up stakes attempt to explain how and why Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism differ as well as discuss why I believe Kants theory provides a more plausible account of ethics. Immanuel Kants deonotological ethical theory assesses if serves atomic number 18 moral based on the individuals will or note of acting. Kants theory can be categorized as a deonotological because works are not assessed to be morally permissible on the basis of consequences they produce, but rather on the form of the agents will in acting, (Dodds, Lecture 7) therefore his actions are based on duty and not consequential. Kantianism is based on three beliefs: maxims, willing, and the mat imperative. Kant states that a maxim is a general rule or prescript which will explain what a person takes himself to be doing and the circumstances in which he takes himself to be doing it (Feldman, 1999, 201).

It is important that this principle be universalisable and that the maxim can be applied consistently to everyone that encounters similar situations, therefore willed as a universal law. The encourage aspect of Kants theory is willing. This involves the agent consistently committing oneself to make an action occur. He states that, In general, we can say that a person wills inconsistently if he wills t hat p be the chemise and he wills that q be! the grapheme and its impossible for p and q to be the case together (Feldman, 1999, 203). The last aspect of Kants theory is the categorical imperative. The grandness of the categorical... If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper