Difference Between Kant And Utilitarianism
Kant or Utilitarianism
In this essay we will discuss what Kant’s and a utilitarian’s view on insider trading would be. As we have discussed in previous essays, Kant believed that moral rules could be known through reason and not just by observation (Shaw and Barry 69). For me this is the basis of all decisions that we make and why I would support Kant’s point of view on insider trading. Utilitarianism concentrates on producing the greatest amount of happiness and using it as a standard to determine if an action is right or wrong (Shaw and Barry 62). Utilitarianism requires too much concentration on individual aspects of what the greatest happiness is and basing moral standards around them.
Kant believed that good will was the only thing truly good that could be used to determine a person’s morality. This good will would make people act out of a sense of duty and not for example, out of self-interest or emotion. Kant used a categorical imperative to determine an actions moral worth. This imperative states that we should always act to will the maxim, or subjective principle, of that action into a universal law (Shaw and Barry 70). I believe Kant would say that insider trading was immoral because inside traders typically act out of …show more content…
If the information was to be shared with all the stockholders and everyone could make a profit, it could be deemed a positive that maximized everyone’s happiness. If the information was not shared and only a handful of investors were able to take advantage it would be immoral because it didn’t produce happiness for all. Another example would be if an insider came to possess information that would potentially put the company out of business, would it be immoral for this insider to pass it along to a rival? This could potentially save jobs that would create more happiness for
In this essay we will discuss what Kant’s and a utilitarian’s view on insider trading would be. As we have discussed in previous essays, Kant believed that moral rules could be known through reason and not just by observation (Shaw and Barry 69). For me this is the basis of all decisions that we make and why I would support Kant’s point of view on insider trading. Utilitarianism concentrates on producing the greatest amount of happiness and using it as a standard to determine if an action is right or wrong (Shaw and Barry 62). Utilitarianism requires too much concentration on individual aspects of what the greatest happiness is and basing moral standards around them.
Kant believed that good will was the only thing truly good that could be used to determine a person’s morality. This good will would make people act out of a sense of duty and not for example, out of self-interest or emotion. Kant used a categorical imperative to determine an actions moral worth. This imperative states that we should always act to will the maxim, or subjective principle, of that action into a universal law (Shaw and Barry 70). I believe Kant would say that insider trading was immoral because inside traders typically act out of …show more content…
If the information was to be shared with all the stockholders and everyone could make a profit, it could be deemed a positive that maximized everyone’s happiness. If the information was not shared and only a handful of investors were able to take advantage it would be immoral because it didn’t produce happiness for all. Another example would be if an insider came to possess information that would potentially put the company out of business, would it be immoral for this insider to pass it along to a rival? This could potentially save jobs that would create more happiness for