Summary Of The Theories Of Kant And John Mill

Human nature partially relies on morality. In everyday encounters, people get involved in different actions and occurrences that require the application of ethical and moral values. Society tends to the morality of actions in different ways, and consists of different views. Some may take into consideration cultural norms, beliefs, values, or the code of law. One universal view that holds is that people do encourage morality, and punishment of immoral people (Hofmann, Wilhelm, et al, 1340). Emmanuel Kant and John Mill developed theories to explain the nature of morality among human beings. Emmanuel Kant based his argument on reasoning and human responsibility where he advocates the use of rational thinking and respect for other people. John
He states that the categorical imperative determines the rightfulness or wrongfulness of any situation, and considers morals as a result of conscience and cognitive processes. His view supports that a person’s actions should always lead to preferable outcomes. The categorical imperative defines actions of people as leading to the fulfillment of duties and responsibilities towards humanity by always using rational decision making (Kant, Immanuel, 2). Therefore, any moral action needs to focus on creating a positive impact on other people. His view advocates for universalism and fairness in judging of moral
The telling of a white lie would fall into this category due to the fact that a white lie is normally used to make another person or group of people feel good. Therefore, if you are lying to make someone feel good about themselves, and producing pleasure and happiness, you are doing it for the greater good. However, Kant would consider the act of lying immoral because lying has been universalized as immoral regardless of happiness producing effects. Using the example of bullying, the Kantian view considers the action immoral and is directly contributed to by unconsciousness and irrational decision making. However, Mill may consider the action morally right or wrong. He may consider the action of bullying morally right if the person bullying satisfied their interests and generated happiness for others. For example, if someone were to stand up to the class bully and teach him a lesson, this will generate happiness for the entire class. On the immoral side, the person standing up to the bully ends up getting beat up, and the class will continue suffering torment from the bully; therefore left feeling dissatisfied and unhappy. According to Kant, morality requires more of common sense and fulfillment of duties than personal interests and feelings. Kant suggests goodwill as the only good, while the rest of the actions