Comparing Ethical Views Of Kant And Herodotus By John Stuart Mill

1294 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: John stuart mill critical analysis

As individuals form societies to assure their self-preservation and self-interest, they establish customs that distinguish one group of individuals from another. As a means of societal norms, customs tend to influence behaviors of individuals who both practice certain habitual activities and maintain commonly recommended ethics. Various geopolitical and cultural characteristics allow development of diverse customs that cause difficulties in understanding moral values of other societies. In particular, the passage from Herodotus describes how the differences in morality between two customs hinder achieving cooperation and mutual agreements. However, theoretical approaches attempting to find ethical similarities in the foundations of diverse customs can provide common grounds to overcome misconception and miscommunication between societies. The consequentialist and deontological perspectives of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill demonstrate that customs with contrasting ethics can be understood by focusing on ramifications of customary …show more content…

From the example of Herodotus, two racial groups demonstrate their unique funeral ceremonies. While Mill would recommend looking at consequences of both funerals and acknowledging similarities, such as happiness and respect, Kant would challenge Mill’s argument with the questions about good will and duty of the racial groups. Deontological Kant would be inclined to examine whether the groups of individuals well served their duty that was expected in the situation where they were required to treat the deceased ancestors’ bodies with respect. Even though these racial groups came up with two opposed methods of worship, they both successfully fulfilled their duty from their points of view and demonstrated to possess good will in their

Show More
Related

  • John Stuart Mill Vs Kierkegaard Essay

    1200 Words  | 3 Pages

    Mill grew up under the influences from his father and Bentham. In his twenties, an indication of the cerebral approach of the early Utilitarians led to Mill’s nervous breakdown. He was influential in the growth of the moral theory of Utilitarianism whose goal was to maximize the personal freedom and happiness of every individual. Mill's principle of utility is that “actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness”. Utilitarianism is the concept that a man should judge everything based on the ability to promote happiness for the greatest number of individual. He believes that Utilitarianism must show how the conversion can be made from an interest in one’s own particular bliss to that of others. John Stuart Mill also states that moral action should not be judged on the individual case but more along the lines of “rule of thumb” and says that individuals ought to measure the outcomes and settle on their choices in view of the consequence and result that advantages the most people. Mill believes that pleasure is the only wanted consequence. Mill supposes that people are gifted with the capacity for conscious thought, and they are not happy with physical delights, but rather endeavor to accomplish the joy of the psyche too. He asserts that individuals want pleasure and reject

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill and Utilitarianism

    1321 Words  | 3 Pages

    Utilitarianism defined, is the contention that a man should judge everything based on the ability to promote the greatest individual happiness. In other words Utilitarianism states that good is what brings the most happiness to the most people. John Stuart Mill based his utilitarian principle on the decisions that we make. He says the decisions should always benefit the most people as much as possible no matter what the consequences might be. Mill says that we should weigh the outcomes and make our decisions based on the outcome that benefits the majority of the people. This leads to him stating that pleasure is the only desirable consequence of our decision or actions. Mill believes that human beings are endowed with the ability for conscious thought, and they are not satisfied with physical pleasures, but they strive to achieve pleasure of the mind as well.

    Read More

  • Aristotle's versus Kant's Categories of the Temperate, the Continent, the Incontinent, the Vicious and the Bestial

    2179 Words  | 5 Pages

    Johnson, R 2014, ‘Kant's Moral Philosophy,’ The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Spring Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), .

    Read More

  • The Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals

    1055 Words  | 3 Pages

    Kant, Immanuel. Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals. Trans. H. J. Paton. 1964. Reprint. New York: Harper Perennial Modern Thought, 2009. Print.

    Read More

  • Why Torture is Morally Wrong

    2139 Words  | 5 Pages

    Hursthouse, R. (2003, July 18). Virtue Ethics. Stanford University. Retrieved March 6, 2014, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/ethics-virtue

    Read More

  • A Comparison of John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant's Ethical Theories

    3195 Words  | 7 Pages

    Mill made a distinction between happiness and sheer sensual pleasure. He defines happiness in terms of higher order pleasure (i.e. social enjoyments, intellectual). In his Utilitarianism (1861), Mill described this principle as follows:According to the Greatest Happiness Principle … The ultimate end, end, with reference to and for the sake of which all other things are desirable (whether we are considering our own good or that of other people), is an existence exempt as far as possible from pain, and as rich as possible enjoyments.Therefore, based on this statement, three ideas may be identified: (1) The goodness of an act may be determined by the consequences of that act. (2) Consequences are determined by the amount of happiness or unhappiness caused. (3) A "good" man is one who considers the other man's pleasure (or pain) as equally as his own.

    Read More

  • paper

    1137 Words  | 3 Pages

    First, I will discuss Mill’s principles and the requirements of his type of utilitarian ethics. Mill’s utilitarian principle can also be known as the “Greatest Happiness Principle”, which states that an action is good as long as it creates happiness. Mill sums up his principle by saying, “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” Mill argues that everyone desires his or her own happiness and thinks that happiness is the one main goal of all humans. However, just because one person desires his happiness doesn’t mean that this one person’s happiness will contribute to the overall society’s happiness. For example, if a person finds happiness in killing innocent people then this is obviously not contributing to the overall happiness of society. Sure, this may make the killer happy, but the families of the victim and society would be deeply angered and saddened from this occurrence. One of the main factors of Mill’s principle is that an action is good as long is it promotes more happiness than pain for society not just for one individual. It is the net happiness that Mill is concerned with rather than just the sole amount of happiness. As long as an action constitutes greater happiness than pain then Mill would deem this action good or moral...

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill And Utilitarianism

    1183 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the debate with the critics of utilitarianism Mill clarifies the principle of utility, which implies general happiness. General happiness requires no...

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism In John Stuart Mill

    1161 Words  | 3 Pages

    John Stuart Mill argues that the rightness or wrongness of an action, or type of action, is a function of the goodness or badness of its consequences, where good consequences are ones that maximize the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. In this essay I will evaluate the essential features of Mill’s ethical theory, how that utilitarianism gives wrong answers to moral questions and partiality are damaging to Utilitarianism.

    Read More

  • Kant and Mill’s Positions on Capital Punishment

    1862 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...places a person’s dignity and honor before life, while Mill places society’s happiness before all else. For Kant, capital punishment serves to preserve the dignity of an individual, while for Mill, capital punishment is used to protect society’s overall happiness. If it were up to you, which side would you take on capital punishment? Kant and Mill raise good questions and points in their perspective arguments, but there are too many contradictions for me to defend on either one of their points of views. I stand against capital punishment.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism vs. Kantianism

    1353 Words  | 3 Pages

    Fred Feldman, 'Kant's Ethics Theory: Exposition and Critique' from H. J. Curzer, ed Ethical Theory and Moral Problems, Belmont, Ca: Wadsworth Publishing Co. 1999.

    Read More

  • Ethics Essay

    612 Words  | 2 Pages

    Human beings are confronted with numerous issues throughout his or her lifetime that would require him or her to examine the best action to take to avoid the damaging consequences. In most cases, individuals restrain his or her action to take into consideration the consequences that may lead to the right or wrong behavior. One’s ethical and moral standards are first learned at an early age from his or her culture, how he or she is raised, religious background, and social system. Scientifically, there are various ethical theories, such as the virtue theory, deontological ethics, and utilitarianism (Boylan, 2009). By understanding these theories one can compare, contrast and uncover the reasoning behind his or her ethical and moral standards.

    Read More

  • Philosophy: John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism

    1314 Words  | 3 Pages

    John Stuart Mill claims that people often misinterpret utility as the test for right and wrong. This definition of utility restricts the term and denounces its meaning to being opposed to pleasure. Mill defines utility as units of happiness caused by an action without the unhappiness caused by an action. He calls this the Greatest Happiness Principle or the Principle of Utility. Mill’s principle states that actions are right when they tend to promote happiness and are wrong when they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. Happiness is defined as intended pleasure and the absence of pain while unhappiness is defined as pain and the lack of pleasure. Therefore, Mill claims, pleasure and happiness are the only things desirable and good. Mill’s definition of utilitarianism claims that act...

    Read More

  • Arguments Against Utilitarianism

    1464 Words  | 3 Pages

    As a philosophical approach, utilitarianism generally focuses on the principle of “greatest happiness”. According to the greatest happiness principle, actions that promote overall happiness and pleasure are considered as right practices. Moreover, to Mill, actions which enhance happiness are morally right, on the other hand, actions that produce undesirable and unhappy outcomes are considered as morally wrong. From this point of view we can deduct that utilitarianism assign us moral duties and variety of ways for maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain to ensure “greatest happiness principle”. Despite all of moral duties and obligations, utilitarian perspective have many specific challenges that pose several serious threats which constitute variety of arguments in this essay to utilitarianism and specifically Mill answers these challenges in his work. These arguments can be determinated and analyzed as three crucial points that seriously challenges utilitarianism. The first issue can be entitled like that utilitarian idea sets too demanding conditions as to act by motive which always serves maximizing overall happiness. It creates single criterion about “being motived to maximize overall happiness” but moral rightness which are unattainable to pursue in case of the maximizing benefit principle challenges utilitarianism. Secondly, the idea which may related with the first argument but differs from the first idea about single criterion issue, utilitarianism demands people to consider and measuring everything which taking place around before people practice their actions. It leads criticism to utilitarianism since the approach sees human-beings as calculators to attain greatest happiness principle without considering cultural differ...

    Read More

  • Reflections on Hedonism

    616 Words  | 2 Pages

    When talking about pleasure there needs to be a distinction between the quality and the quantity. While having many different kinds of pleasures can be considered a good thing, one is more likely to favor quality over quantity. With this distinction in mind, one is more able to quantify their pleasures as higher or lesser pleasures by ascertaining the quality of them. This facilitates the ability to achieve the fundamental moral value that is happiness. In his book Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill offers a defining of utility as pleasure or the absence of pain in addition to the Utility Principle, where “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Mill 7). Through this principle, Mill emphasizes that it is not enough to show that happiness is an end in itself. Mill’s hedonistic view is one in support of the claim that every human action is motivated by or ought to be motivated by the pursuit of pleasure.

    Read More

More about Comparing Ethical Views Of Kant And Herodotus By John Stuart Mill

Open Document