Why is mill better than kant

The actions that we take are not just a set of events that we have no control over. Other philosophers believe that they are just another set of events that are determined by the things we cannot control. He also bases morality as a matter of duty that is common sense.

Kant believes the only purely good thing is this idea of good will. In saying this, Kant draws a line between good will and traits like happiness, wealth, and even health that are usually thought to be good.

However, why is happiness held as the means by which one justifies consequences or maximized good, rather than suffering? Utilitarianism does not pretend to give a purely formal answer. Likewise, Kant must assign some moral content to subjunctive consequences. While much detail may exist in these consequences through the typic the nature of law and while all possibilities of the kingdom of ends might be specified and imagined, the permissibility of maxims is still….

Essays Essays FlashCards. Browse Essays. Sign in. Essay Sample Check Writing Quality. Show More. Related Documents Kant's Ethical Theory Of Ethics It involves assessing what the people perceive to be moral and taking actions which will produce insignificant consequences on the people other than the individual performing the act.

Read More. Words: - Pages: 5. Words: - Pages: 7. Both appeal to consequences in the application of their first principle to the derivation of duties, Kant in considering the consequences of a maxim's becoming a universal law of nature and Mill in considering the consequences of a certain kind of action e. Both appeal to rationality to evaluate morality, in the sense that they reason from a fundamental principle about what is morally right or wrong. Both recognize the existing of a "moral sense", although neither regards it as the basis of morality unlike the 18th century Scottish moral sense theorists.

I will let you sort this out, but I must admit there are many times I don't want to do something, but feel I must out of a sense of duty like right at this moment, visiting some one in the hospital instead of sitting here typing this lecture.

This last point indicates another problem with Kant's ethical theory: Here I have two conflicting moral duties: to finish this introductory lecture or to visit some one who in the past has been dear to me.

Kant's formal position offers no criteria for determining what to do in conflicting situations. Is it then necessary to mix ethical positions and appeal to utilitarianism to make my decision. I ought to continue with this lecture because it entails the greatest good an arguable assumption on my part?