Kant and Mills Theories Essay -- social issues

Kant and Mills Theories In July of 1994, capital of Minnesota J. cumulation, a former Presbyterian minister and later a pro-life activist, was prosecuted for killing Dr. magic trick Britton, an abortion do doctor, and James Barrett, a volunteer, outside a clinic in Pensacola, Florida. Prior to this, agglomerate commented on the murder of Dr. David Gunn, another abortion performing doctor, stating that it was a biblically warrant homicide (P. 215). This statement shows how strong hillocks beliefs were and leads one to assume that he did not regret killing Britton and Barrett. This paper get out address the Hill case and determine the ethical parameter in which Paul Hill should have acted. The twain philosophical approaches that entrust be examined and contrasted are the Kantian and Utilitarian perspectives. Kant and Mills point of view on the swear outs of Paul J. Hill will be presented ground on their theories. Lastly, I will explain why I believe that Kants surmisal pro vides a more arguable account of morality. Kantianism and Utilitarianism are two theories that attempt to firmness the moral nature of human beings. Immanuel Kants moral system is found on a belief that reason is the final authority for morality. John Stuart Mills moral system is establish on the surmise known as utilitarianism, which is based upon utility, or doing what produces the greatest happiness. One of Kants lasting contributions to moral philosophy was his emphasis on the notion of take note for persons. He considers respect for persons (a.k.a the Kantian respect) to be the fundamental moral belief of ethical philosophy. His Kantianism premise is a deontological moral guess which claims that the right action in any given situation is determined by the monotonous imperative, which he calls the Supreme Principle. This imperative is a command that applies to all judicious beings independent of their lusts. It is a command that reason tells us to follow no matter what (P.31). Kant considers this an objective law of reason and because it applies to all of us, he calls it a widely distributed practical law for all rational beings. The hypothetical imperative, on the contrary, is a conditional command, which we have reason to follow if (it) serve(s) some desire of ours (P.31). For example, if you want X, then you will do Y, whereas with the categorical imperative, X has vigor to do with why you do Y.Kants categor... ...es, I believe that Kantianism provides a more plausible account of ethics. Kantianism is more consistent of a theory and can be universally applied to all beings. It is more plausible because even if the consequences of performing an action are not necessarily the best, the means is still obligated to perform the action because it is there duty to do so. Therefore, ethically and morally they are doing the right thing. In conclusion, this paper has discussed two main theories regarding the ethical behavior of human beings. Kantian ism is a theory based on duties, maxims, willing and the categorical imperative. Also, it focuses on the motivation of actions, has clear and discrete set of universal rules, and is morally logical. On the other hand, Utilitarianism is based on the concept that we ought to do whatever produces the greatest overall utility and this will be the morally right action. Furthermore, it relies on the consequences of an action, has no set universal laws as each action is assessed on an individual basis, and morality is based on the results of the assessment. Because of these reasons, I believe that Kantianism is the more ethically plausible theory of the two.