Utilitarianism and Kantian Ethics Ethics is one part of philosophy that will always be studied‚ and like most subjects in philosophy‚ will never be viewed the same by everyone. There are so many cultures that have so many different beliefs about the way a person’s life should be lived out. Things like religion‚ poverty‚ and mental health all contribute to our beliefs in ethics. Some people believe that the mental state of a person or the motive for that person committing a crime should be
Premium
Report 4 (1) Is cost-benefit analysis a legitimate tool? Is it’s application to non-economic matters – say to calculating the value of human life – ethically justifiable? What would Immanuel Kant say about placing a monetary value on human life? Is doing so ever morally legitimate? What would an utilitarian say about placing a monetary value on human life? (View the Sandel-video very‚ very carefully‚ generate your own notes on Jeremy Bentham’s and John Stuart Mill’s utilitarian theory and only
Premium Ethics Morality Utilitarianism
outline the basic tenets of an Aristotelean approach to justice (in your answer‚ be sure to show how it differs from modern theories of justice). Of the four “Negative Evaluations” of Virtue Ethics (see handout)‚ which do you think is the most serious? Why? Which theory – virtue ethics‚ utilitarianism‚ Kantian morality -- in your view‚ is the most convincing (you must select one)? Why? [20 marks] • Note: the most convincing answers are those that explain the main tenets the theory (e.g. Kantian
Premium Political philosophy John Rawls A Theory of Justice
Utilitarianism and deontology are two moral theories that can often pull us in different direction. Utilitarianism is the ethical doctrine that virtue is based on utility‚ and that conduct should be directed toward promoting the greatest happiness of the greatest number of persons. This can be viewed as a contingent right. Contingent means something that could happen or come up depending on other occurrences. An example of a contingent right is the unexpected need for a bandage on a hike. The bandage
Premium
There are obvious problems with both Act and Rule Utilitarianism. Both theories share the common goal of achieving the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. However‚ it is impossible to measure or compare happiness‚ as one persons happiness may not necessarily be another’s. And how do we measure intangible gain‚ such as happiness against material gain‚ such as money? The root principle is a good concept‚ but it’s the means to which we arrive at the end that cause the problems. In
Premium Ethics
brother was at the hindsight of my mind‚ consequences for me‚ my brother‚ and extended and nuclear family were an even more important consideration for me. Act-utilitarianism justifies what is right or wrong by the consequences of a situation; this explains why it is the main principle to use for my scenario. This traditional form of utilitarianism focuses on whether an act is morally permissible or required based on the predicted or actual consequences. Because my actual consequences were very similar
Premium Utilitarianism
made. Ultimately the pilot had to jettison Marilyn out of the ship in order to save himself and the other six men that needed the fever serum. We are going to look at this situation from Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative‚ Mills principle of Utilitarianism‚ the number principle‚ and my comparing it other scenarios discussed in class. Categorical Imperative‚ a term coined by Immanuel Kant‚ argues that moral requirements are based on a standard of rationality. Immorality is a violation to the categorical
Premium Immanuel Kant Morality
theory of Utilitarianism The theory of Utilitarianism takes its name from the Latin word Utilis‚ meaning ‘useful’. It was first developed by Jeremy Bentham‚ a philosopher and legal theorist of the 18th century. Bentham sought to produce a modern and rational approach to morality which would suit the changing society of the industrial age. This was also the era of the French and American Revolutions‚ and of the Enlightenment‚ so orthodox morality was challenged on many fronts. Utilitarianism may be
Free Utilitarianism
The theories of Utilitarianism and Ethical egoism differ in many ways‚ however‚ they are both similar in the aspect of making choices and having the best outcome for those choices. Ethical egoism claims that an action must be morally right and completely maximize ones own self-interest or interests. The “opposing theory” Utilitarianism‚ states that an action must be one that produces the most good overall or to all those affected. Utilitarianism and Ethical egoism are forms of consequentialism in
Premium Ethics Ethical egoism Morality
important than the act itself? Mill’s utilitarianism and Kantianism sit in opposition to each other. Utilitarianism advocates for the judgment of actions based on the happiness they create and advocate for consequentialism. Kantianism advocates for the judgment of actions based on the intrinsic features of the act. Essentially‚ utilitarianism gives the highest regard to what will happen‚ whereas Kantianism gives regard to what is being done. Although utilitarianism is right to examine how an act affects
Premium Utilitarianism Ethics Morality