Barbara Argument in Ethics

Jose Collado,

The best way to define Kantian ethics versus Utilitarianism would be conversely in this situation. Whereas Kantian ethics focuses more so on our rationality and autonomy as the definition of us as moral beings, Utilitarianism is more concerned with the overall happiness and its promotion in the world. Kantian ethics considers more the action rather than its end while Utilitarian’s would be defined more as hedonistic yet egalitarian in nature.

In determining which of these two views on ethics would be considered more plausible, my main focus was guided by one of Kantian's principles: The Universal Law Version of The Moral Law. When the morality of an action or consequence is taken into consideration, applying the behaviors, intentions, and ends of the situation universally seemed to be the most effective manner in making this determination. I first considered Utilitarianism, but ultimate happiness cannot always be the indicative factor. For this reason I was sold on Kantian ethics. I feel like for this reason Kantian ethics is less popular than Utilitarianism. The idea that one should act always in good faith is one that for this world of humans is nearly impossible to follow. Yet, I feel that that's what makes it the best judge of morality. If the reasons an action that some would consider to be good are not in good faith than the action itself is unethical. This is Kant's belief. Although I do not totally agree with that I can say that applying the intent of an action to other situations if considered unethical can yield bad results more often than would a good intention.

All good intentions are ethical.

All self-sacrifices are good intentions.

All self-sacrifices are ethical.