1- Kantian Ethics: Kant believed that what defines us as human beings is our rationality and autonomy. He believed that we should never use ourselves or anyone else simply as a means, meaning we shouldn't ever undermine our own or anyone else's rationality or autonomy. Kant also believed that we should promote our own rationality and autonomy as well as that of others. In Kantian ethics, the intention behind an action determines whether or not is was ethical, not the outcome and consequences of said action. Kantian ethics applies to everyone, at all times. It should never change based on our desires or inclinations. It is universal. As humans, we should strive to perfect ourselves and at the same time, promote the happiness of others.
Utilitarianism: According to the Utilitarians, actions are right (and therefore, moral) if they promote happiness and pain avoidance, and wrong (immoral) if they promote unhappiness or pain. What the Utilitarians believe defines us as humans are the different kinds of pleasures and pains we are capable of experiencing. As humans, we can experience two types of pleasures and pains, bodily, and intellectual. Our morality tells us to maximize our own happiness, but at the same time we shouldn't favor our own happiness over the happiness of others. We should act in a way that generates the most happiness for everyone who is involved.
2- I think that the Utilitarians have a more plausible theory because as humans, we are very hedonistic. We want to receive pleasure, whether bodily or intellectual, and avoid pain. It is the easier of the two theories to follow, as it is out nature to act in a way that will promote our happiness. Kant wants us to think primarily of others, and strive for perfection. It is simply impossible to live your life in this way and to never stray from it. Utilitarians only care about the outcome of an action, if it is a good outcome, then it was a moral decision, while Kant cares about the intention. As humans, our intentions aren't always moral. I believe that the Utilitarianism theory is more plausible because actions that promote our happiness are considered moral, and humans are naturally self-centered and more willing to do what makes them happy.
3- Barbara Argument:
All actions that promote happiness are considered morally good.
All act of intellectual pleasure promote happiness.
Therefore, all acts of intellectual pleasure are considered morally good.
The descriptions of the two moral theories was written well. However there should have been more reasons to back up the claim the Utilitarianism is more plausible. Also Kantian ethics does not only want to help others. It strives for autonomy and rationality for themselves and other. Expanding on part two would have help your argument.
ReplyDelete