2. How would Richard Taylor respond to O'neil's defense of Kantianism?
In the following questions, Onora O'neil defends Kantian ethics while Richard
Taylor agrees more with the Utilitarian ethics view. To fully understand both views and
why each author defends their view, a brief introduction of each author and who they are
is necessary. Onora O'neil is a philosophy professor at Cambridge University, while
Richard Taylor also teaches philosophy, at the University of Rochester. He has written
many books on ethics and metaphysics. He strongly criticizes Kant's philosophy by
saying it is too abstract. The Philosopher Kant in contrast with Mill deals with,
deontological ethics that, means rule based ethics, which basically deals with an either
wrong or right way of action. For example, in terms of stealing, Kant would say that this
action or act is always wrong. Mill (Utilitarian ethics) on the other hand who deals with
Consequentialist ethics which basically means that our actions have a consequence but
that it all depends on the situation or incident of for example, stealing is right or wrong.
Mill, who is famous for Utilitarianism, decides on every incident of a situation. Both of
these Philosophers are mostly concern with principal of individual action, which is our
intent or our acts in general. The difference between them is whether these acts are either
right or wrong. While Mill focuses on the consequences of actions, Kant does not, and
puts more emphasis on our actions.
1. To fully explain Onora O'neil's argument for preferring Kantian ethics to
Utilitarianism, a summary is needed of what Kantianism is all about. Onora O'neil's
argument is very useful because it explains in detail a review of Kantianism and a
comparison of this with Utilitarianism. The main requirement Onora O'neil