Philosophies Of Kant, Mill's Moral Approach

Philosophers Kant, Mill, Aristotle, and Held each describe their moral approaches to ethical problems and dilemmas in our text book, Exploring Ethics. I compared Kant’s “categorical imperative,” Mill’s “utilitarianism,” Aristotle’s “nature of virtue,” and Held’s “ethics of care,” philosophies. Each of the theories were approaches to moral dilemmas in life and they each made logical sense, but Mill’s utilitarianism approach seemed to me to be the best way to face a moral or ethical dilemma. Mill’s approach is centered around “the greatest happiness principle,” promoting the most happiness as possible with the least amount of pain.

Mill’s approach to moral dilemmas is ideal because it focuses on the greatest happiness principle. If everyone were

This theory also implies basing your decision on a preferred outcome. Those who follow Mills’ approach make their decisions based on a desired outcome, one that makes the people around us happiest in the long run. His philosophy highlights how some pleasure are better than others, he states “it is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied” (120). He mentions how some men “pursue sensual indulgences to the injury of health, though perfectly aware that health is the greater good” (120), which helps to describe the differences in pleasure. The man pursuing sensual indulgences despite hurting his health in the long run would be the satisfied pig in the metaphor mentioned before. Thinking of the result of things in this way is useful in the modern day. Say you’re a full-time college student who also works full-time, you see all your friends out partying and enjoying their early adulthood in their free time because their parents help pay for their college or they have more financial aid, yet you must non-stop work to finance your education. You could drop out, enjoy your early life, because who knows, you might die

Since I moved from home I've been working two jobs and going to school, doing well for myself. While I've been gone, my family has been going through some financial troubles caused by a car wreck that left my mom without a vehicle and unable to make payments on a new one. Since then my mom and siblings have tried to subtly ask me for money, although I'm not their last resort. They try to make me feel guilty for not giving them money, and of course I do. But my money is for my school, food, and rent and ultimately my future. By saving my money I could continue my college courses this semester as well as finally purchase a more reliable vehicle. Although it was late, I was able to use the money I got for selling my old junk car to give to my mom as a down payment for her car. In the end, I didn’t have to slow down on my college courses and was able to help my mother. William Frankena’s Morality and Moral Philosophy helped to guide my decision making. Frankena states “we must not let our decision be determined by our emotions, but must examine the question and follow the best reasoning” (3). If I had let guilt guide my decision I would have been behind a semester, and unhappier. I asked myself, is my feeling sorry for my mom’s situation more important than completing this semester? Because I waited I had more money to give my mom, which I wouldn’t have had if I had