Kantian Ethics v.s Utilitarianism

As we saw in class last week, Kant and the Utilitarian’s disagree about the nature of moral responsibility. Kantian's ethics defines us as persons and believe that we should never undermine our own rationality or autonomy let alone anyone else’s. Kant believed if you acted morally that you are doing the right thing with good intentions. The intention behind that action is what determines what it is ethical or unethical not the consequence itself. He states that we should promote our own and other people’s rationality and autonomy. This means that we need to start thinking of others before we think of ourselves first. You know how we make other people happy without little white lies or doing anything just for the pure good. Acts out of good willed intentions for no reason are what we need to succeed in to promote happiness to others so we are happy ourselves. Like walking down the street you see an elderly woman who needs help crossing street you help her because it’s the right thing not because you have something to gain. Kant's ethic teaches you how to become selfless.

Utilitarianism tells us that we as humans are morally based on increasing pleasure and decreasing pain. The idea of Utilitarianism is to act in a way that produces the greatest amount of happiness for all people who are affected by it which would mean to always act in the greatest interest of others. It’s a theory that your actions should be motivated by happiness and be free of pain. These are the moral benefits of an action that are determined by the outcome of the action and don’t matter if it was done for personal reasons or just as a gesture. Like giving one of your friends a ride if you see them walking. The gesture would be asking them do they need a ride the personal reason would be you would want them to do the same thing if they saw you walking one day.Utilitarianism doesn't teach you anything but to only do things so that they can help you as well, whether right after the good dead or in the long run there is nothing selfless about that.

Between Kant’s ethics and Utilitarianism I believe that Kant’s moral ethic theory is the more plausible. Because in reality that’s how all people should act in and around the world. The problem with utilitarianism is that by waiting for the outcome of someone’s action, that person doesn't have a reliable standard to determine what is good or bad and can only wait and see what the outcome is afterward. It’s basically like gambling with ethics and philosophy, a moral dice that you roll and take a chance on, better luck next time. Kant’s ethics are about just doing the right thing for the right reason and not wanting anything back in return. To me doing something good for the right the right reason is selfless. By flowing Kant’s ethics it teaches you to want to do well and bring happiness to others and feeling good yourself as well. This makes you a rational person instead of an irrational and it will make you a better person. By you doing the right thing you will feel happier within yourself.

The Barbara Theory

1. All selfless acts are morally good.

2. All acts of kindness are acts of selflessness.

3. Therefore all acts of kindness are morally good.