Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Kant-vs-utilitarianism
Kant-vs-utilitarianism
Utilitarian theory and kantian theory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Kant-vs-utilitarianism
Ethical and Philosophical Questions about Value and Obligation
I Recall the distinction between metaethics and normative ethics. Normative
ethics deals with substantial ethical issues, such as, What is intrinsically good?
What are our moral obligations? Metaethics deals with philosophical issues about
ethics: What is value or moral obligation? Are there ethical facts? What sort of
objectivity is possible in ethics? How can we have ethical knowledge?
Recall, also, the fundamental dilemma of metaethics. Either there are
ethical facts or there aren?t. If they are, what sort of facts are they? In what do
they consist? If there are not, why do we think, talk, and feel as though there are?
II Philosophical ethics is the integration of metaethics and normative ethics?the
attempt to come to an integrated understanding of both. Given our current
perspective, how can we view the philosophical ethics of Mill, Kant, Aristotle,
Nietzsche, and the ethics of care?
III For Mill, the question is what is the relation between his (metaethical)
empirical naturalism and his (normative) qualitatively hedonist value theory
and his utilitarian moral theory? One place we can see Mill?s empiricism is his
treatment, in Chapter III, of the question of why the principle of utility is
?binding?, how it can generate a moral obligation. Compare Mill?s treatment of
this question with Kant?s treatment of the question of why the CI is binding in
Chapter III of the Groundwork.
IV What is Kant?s metaethics? Since he holds that morality is both necessary and
a priori, Kant must be some kind of rationalist. But, unlike Plato, he is not the
kind of rationalist who holds that there are metaphysically...
... middle of paper ...
...ception might underlie the ethics of care?
Think about how we experience our relationships to others. Don?t we experience
particular others as making claims on us? Personal relationships are probably the
best examples, but aren't relationships with strangers quite similar. Think, for
example, of fundamental forms of human exchange like gift-giving, promise, and
contract. Indeed, the original root meaning of ?obligation? refers to bond created
between individuals by such exchanges. As in, ?much obliged.?
VIII Of course, we have only been able to pursue some of the many
different ways in which philosophers have tried to think through the ethical and
philosophical questions about value and obligation that any thoughtful human
being faces. In the end, it is up to each of us to decide what answers to these
questions we find most convincing.
Hocus Pocus is a word that most powerful witches or people use when they see a magical thing happen whether it’s a good thing or a bad thing. The film Hocus Pocus is about a boy named Max who brings his sister, Dani, and the girl he likes named Allison on an adventure. The adventure started when he heard a story in class about a boy named Thackery Binx. Thackery was trying to save his sister, who was taken by the sister witches. When he went to the house to find her, the sister witches turned him into a black cat. After hearing the story, Max went to the sister witch house with the girls and jokingly lit the candle. This caused the sister witches to come back to the house. The rest of the movie shows
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. Trans. Norman Kempsmith. New York: The Humanities P, 1950.
Immanuel Kant is one of the renowned representatives of German modern philosophy which was predominantly built on the philosophical concepts of human right, mind, morals and the importance of ownership. His central concept is reason and philosophical epistemology is based not only on theoretical, but also combined with the empirical aspects, which refers to the practical philosophy that covers from human behavior to human action. Generally speaking, the practical philosophy deals with the ground concept that relates to the human deliberative action. In the “Critique of Pure Reason” says that there is only congenital right, the independence which is the right to be detached from the other’s interest. Kant’s
In this paper, I will critique Kantian ethic’s failure to defend beings disputably labeled “irrational.” The concept of a rational being is a common motif throughout Immanuel Kant’s “Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals.” These beings comprise the foundation of his entire argument. Therefore, for the purpose of this essay, it is crucial to further examine what is meant by “rational.” Kant offers three essential requirements that separate rational beings from their irrational counterparts; the ability to reason, a moral will, and autonomy (53, 49, 41.) Rational beings are those included in his ideal “kingdom of ends” (39.) He defines this kingdom as “a systematic union of rational beings through common objective law” (39.) Since Kant’s code of ethics only applies to those deemed rational, some fundamental questions remain ambiguous. Firstly, in what manner should Kant’s higher capacity beings interact with those “incapable” of reason? Could those who fail to meet the three requirements be abused or exploited? Would this be justified? Some may conclude that Kant has evaded these inquiries altogether.
Philosophical Ethical Theories As we know, philosophers divide ethical theories into three major classes. They are Metaethics(descriptive), Conceptual(applied), and Normative(prescriptive). Metaethics basically takes the scientific approach to concocting where exactly our ethical principals and philosophies come from (Feiser, 2005). Descriptions and explanations of moral behaviors and beliefs are provided on the basis of facts studied by such specialists of anthropology, sociology and history (Beauchamp & Bowie, 2005).
But Kant also made a less familiar distinction between analytic and synthetic judgments, according to the information conveyed as their content. Analytic judgments are those whose predicates are entirely contained in their subjects; since they add nothing to our concept of the subject, such judgments are purely explicative and can be deduced from the principle of non-contradiction. Synthetic judgments, on the other hand, are those whose predicates are altogether distinct from their subjects, to which they must be shown to relate because of some real connection external to the concepts themselves. Hence, synthetic judgments are genuinely informative but require justification by reference to some outside principle.
Obvious -the word that perhaps succinctly defines the way Kant saw the truths of the world around him. Not so obvious are the arguments that lie within his writings. As he emphasizes the importance, yet confusing nature of reason in his Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, he proves his own point by his reasoning processes. However, in this work he systematically develops his argument for a universal good- the good will, in which inclination, duty, and reason play crucial roles. In this essay I will explain Kant's reasoning behind his statement that the only true good, without qualification, is the good will, and consequentially determine whether his idea of good varies from the Platonic ideal of goodness.
According to Morrison and Furlong, normative ethics discovers what is right and wrong and guides decision making for all situations in many areas including health care. A normative ethical theory that this research will discuss is virtue ethics in the American health care system. The purpose of this research is to develop potential for excellence and to find the highest good for humans by doing what is right short-term, long-term, and to compete globally (Morrison & Furlong, 2013). Giving certain situations each theory can provide tools to assist in decision-making but virtue ethics concentrates on excellence and perfection.
... value through discussing duty in light of a priori and experience. In conclusion, he suggests that because actions depend on specific circumstances, a priori beliefs cannot be extracted from experience. People’s experiences and actions are based on circumstantial motivations; thus they can’t conform to categorical imperatives either because categorical imperatives are principles that are intrinsically good and must be obeyed despite the circumstance or situation. Kant concludes that rational beings are ends in themselves and that principle is a universal law, which comes from reason and not experience.
Ng, John. "The Four Faces of Face." Mediate.com. N.p., n.d. May 2008. Web. 09 Apr. 2014.
While Kant’s theory may seem “overly optimistic” (Johnson, 2008) now, it was ruled as acceptable and rational behavior then. Kant believed that any moral or ethical decision could be achieved with consistent behavior. While judgment was based on reason, morals were based on rational choices made by human beings (Freeman, 2000). A human’s brain is the most advanced in the animal kingdom. Not only do human beings work on instinct, but they have the ability to sort out situations in order to make a decision. This includes weighing the pros and cons of decisions that could be made and how they affect others either positively or negatively. This is called rational thought. Kant believed that any human being able to rationalize a decision before it was made had the ability to be a morally just person (Freeman, 2000). There were certain things that made the decision moral, and he called it the “Categorical Imperative” (Johnson, 2008). If someone was immoral they violated this CI and were considered irrational. The CI is said to be an automatic response which was part of Kant’s argument that all people were deserving of respect. This automatic response to rational thinking is where he is considered, now, to be “overly optimistic” (Johnson, 2008).
Johnson, Robert, Johnson,. "Kant's Moral Philosophy." Stanford University. Stanford University, 23 Feb. 2004. Web. 27 Nov. 2013.
Every day we are confronted with questions of right and wrong. These questions can appear to be very simple (Is it always wrong to lie?), as well as very complicated (Is it ever right to go to war?). Ethics is the study of those questions and suggests various ways we might solve them. Here we will look at three traditional theories that have a long history and that provide a great deal of guidance in struggling with moral problems; we will also see that each theory has its own difficulties. Ethics can offer a great deal of insight into the issues of right and wrong; however, we will also discover that ethics generally won’t provide a simple solution on which everyone can agree (Mosser, 2013).
Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and Nietzsche all had their own ideas for which one could reach happiness in his/her life. All have similarities in there reasoning except Nietzshe, who contradicts the others entirely.
Understanding who we are as individuals can be a struggle for people throughout life. It can be difficult to comprehend who we are and why we exist. There are daily outside influences that help create who we are and what our values are. Values play a significant role in our lives. They shape the choices we make and reveal a big part of our identity to the world. Some values may be more important than others, but they still manage to influence our lives in one way or another, whether we know it or not. Values can range from a tangible item to an idea that has influenced us to stand by and remember those values. The values we hold with the highest importance act as a guide and help us prioritize our purpose and goals in our daily life. My family has taught me a list of values and traits that have helped me become a well-rounded individual. I value my family more than anything because most of my core inner values have started from their teachings at one point or another. My top values that I have developed from my family are dedication, honesty, and wisdom. I will discuss who I am in terms of the important values that shape my personal belief system and decision making framework that, in essence, describes the direction of my life.