Mills theory of Utilitarianism states that actions are right in proportions, as they tend to promote happiness, wrong, as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. In his arguments, Mill is of the opinion that happiness varies in quality and quantity. He also says that, pleasures in one's higher faculties should hold more weight than baser pleasures. In Rescue I, Mill would tell the rescuer to rescue the five trapped in the car. In his theory, Mill argues that people need to accept right through comparing consequences of all agents of alternative rules for specific situations. In rescue ii, Mill would advise on saving the five still since utilitarianism is about the greater good for more significant numbers. Utilitarianism requires one to the overall outcome and one has to be impartial to act on utilitarianism.
The Principle of Utility says that actions are right if they promote happiness or pleasure, wrong, as they tend to produce unhappiness or pain. The principle of utility, therefore, means that doing the right thing does not always provide pleasure and we sometimes experience pain when we leave the actions unfulfilled. By the principle of utility both situations, the five would be rescued at the expense of the individual. The Utilitarianism and the Principle of Utility quantify pleasure. Saving one person at the cost of the five is a partial judgment not aligning with utilitarianism facets.
Kant suggests evaluating our intentions in performing a particular action. Kantianism holds that human life is valuable since they are the bearer of balanced life. Kantianism holds that no life is precious than the other. According to the deontological theory, Kant would advise the rescuer to look for a suitable way that will rescue the two parties. Second, obligation, and well thought should guide the rescuer's cause of action. In the first categorical imperative, the rescuer should act by that maxim and same time wills that, it becomes the universal law without contradiction. Therefore, the rescuer's action should be free from specific conditions including his identity as a rescuer. The maxim of the rescuer needs to be separate from the surrounding and details of the situation. Kant would advise the rescuer not to act on illogical intentions. In Rescue 2 the rescuer should first rescue one man before attempting to save the five trapped in the car. In rescue one, the rescuer should assess the situation carefully and decide what is the moral action to pursue.
The second imperative states that all the measures need considerations as ends rather than principles. The second crucial states that end have a subjective nature only if they are in parallels to a hypothetical imperative. This essential claims that a parson has a duty not to use themselves or others as a means to some other end. The second imperative would say that in Rescue 1 and two, the rescuer should not forsake any life either his or the victims to terminate the others life.
Mills theory of utilitarianism disregards value of life if one individual should suffer at the expense of others. It is also clear to say that utilitarianism has little support on human rights. If someones rights stand in the way to promote greater pleasure, then they are disregarded. This theory causes a lot of suffering especially for the less fortunate in the world now. Kants theory, on the other hand, does not help at all in solving issues especially when interest is conflicting. In addition, Kant's theory disregards emotions as an appropriate basis for action. In my view, In conclusion, utilitarianism theory does not question the reason for performing certain actions. As far as utilitarianism is concerned the result if it increases pleasure, it is justifiable. Utilitarianism theory is a violation of people's rights and respect especially in cases of rescue missions. Kantianism is the superior approach as it upholds humans value in the society. People should not be used as a means to an end holds water to me. People use other individuals in the world today to get to their trophies, which are utterly wrong. Kantianism holds that using people is to involve them in a scheme of action to which they could not in principle consent (Onora).
BIBLIOGRAPHY Onora, O'Neil. "A Simplified Account of Kants Ethics." Philpapers 19 October 2014: 411-415.
Philosophy Factory. 23 May 2011. 7 December 2016 <https://philosophyfactory.wordpress.com/2011/05/30/kant-vs-utilitarianism-2/>.
Sirotkin, Racheal. Scolar Blogs. 14 October 2014. 7 December 2016 <https://scholarblogs.emory.edu/millsonph115/2014/10/19/kantianism-utilitarianism/>.
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SuperbGrade website, please click below to request its removal:
- Automatic Identification of Familiar Faces
- Law vs. Morality and Social Standards
- Analysis of Robert Coles Works
- Making a Moral Decision
- Expository Essay on Self-Concept and Identity
- Compare and Contrast Essay Sample on Philosophies of Fukuyama and Bailey on Transhumanism
- Corporate Ethics: Introduction and Relevance to Hospitality