Kant vs. Mill - 1576 Words

Kant vs Mills in Animal Rights In this essay I will cover the philosophy of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. I will begin by covering Kant perspective of rational beings and his idea of a priori learning. I will then move on to his idea of categorical imparaitive. After Kant I will discuss Mill’s utilitarian theory regarding pleasure and pain. With a better understanding of those I will move to Mill’s idea of a posteriori and hypothetical imperative. Following the ideas of these philosophers I will attempt to depict their viewpoints of the issue of animal cruelty through experimentation. To conclude the essay I will state my stance and who’s side, if either, I take in the animal cruelty controversy. First, I will talk†¦show more content†¦The people saved produced more happiness than the pain of one death. On the other hand, had someone killed Hitler and a more deviant person taken Hitler’s position, and retaliated by capturing and killing eve n more innocent people the act of killing Hitler would have been morally wrong. At no point is the act of killing wrong just the consequence that it produces. Mills believes the highest good will follow the principle of utility. The principle of utility argues that actions that produce the most happiness are the morally correct thing to do. Therefore the basis of the consequences determines what we are morally obligated to do. Mills thinks that we should know what to do based on experience and observation, also known as a posteriori. This is opposite from Kant believing that those factors should not count in moral decisions. Mill also believes that actions should be made in order to gain other things, this is call hypothetical imperative. With a better understanding of these philosophers I would like to put them in a debate over animal rights. Focusing on kant’s arguments, I believe that he would share my overall idea that animals do not possess rights. Kant believes that onl y humans beings are rational due to the fact that only humans can conceive, compose, and understand statements that can become universal laws. I believe that animals cannot learn in an a priori manner because they are tied to instinctive and stimulusShow MoreRelatedKant And Mill Vs. Mill2026 Words   |  9 Pagesalongside modern philosophers Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. In this essay I will argue, utilizing theories from Kant and Mill and incorporating my own ideas in support, that virtue is the ultimate key to living a fulfilling life. In support of my position, I will cite theories from both Kant and Mill, as well as related concepts from other philosophers, including the â€Å"experience machine.† Mill is noted for his theory on utilitarianism. According to Mill, utility is equated with happiness, andRead MoreKant Vs. Mill : The Battle Of Morality1910 Words   |  8 PagesKant vs. Mill: The Battle of Morality Section I Immanuel Kant states that moral law must be discovered through a priori investigation in order for it to be universal. He rejects that moral law can be discovered through empirical feelings or experiences. He says, â€Å"All philosophy insofar as it is founded on experience may be called empirical, while that which sets forth its doctrines as founded entirely on a priori principles may be called pure† (Kant 1). Kant values a priori knowledge on a higherRead MoreJohn Stuart Mill vs. Immanuel Kant2163 Words   |  9 PagesJohn Stuart Mill vs. Immanuel Kant The aim of this paper is to clearly depict how John Stuart Mill’s belief to do good for all is more appropriate for our society than Immanuel Kant’s principle that it is better to do whats morally just. I will explain why Mill’s theory served as a better guide to moral behavior and differentiate between the rights and responsibilities of human beings to themselves and society. Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill are philosophers who addressed the issues of moralityRead MoreThe Mill Vs. Kant : An Evaluation Of Their Approaches Towards Ethics1730 Words   |  7 Pages Mill vs. Kant: An Evaluation of their Approaches Towards Ethics John Stuart Mill and Emmanuel Kant both have very distinct ideals and principles. Though they were both philosophers within the same century, but their ideals did not align with each other. Mill focused more on overall happiness, while Kant focused more on the reasons people have for committing certain actions. This is important because it makes the validity of actions and their moral worth put in question. The problem being addressedRead MoreEssay on Kant Vs Mill on the Issue of Lying1764 Words   |  8 Pagesdetails later on including the patient’s state, but to answer this ethical question, two theorists will be presented for the con and pro side. For the con side, the deontologist Immanuel Kant will be presented with his theory that lying is prohibited under all circumstances, as for the pro side, John Stuart Mill will be presented for the utilitarian theory stating that whichever decision brings out the most happiness is the right decision. After discussing the case, my personal view of what is rightRead MoreEssay Kant vs. Mill: Human Rights and Utilitarianism1729 Words   |  7 Pagesincluding philosophical theories in the past. This paper looks at the theories of two philosophers, Emmanuel Kant and John Stuart Mills, and how their teachings can be used to explain the sources of human rights. Kant’s moral philosophy is very direct in its justification of human rights, especially the ideals of moral autonomy and equality as applied to rational human beings. John Stuart Mills’ theory of utilitarianism also forms a solid basis for human rights, especially his belief that utility isRead MorePsychological and Ethical Egoism, Mill vs Kant, and Ethical Relativism904 Words   |  4 Pagesthat an individual’s actions revolve around what is right or wrong in the sense of morality. They focus more on the virtues they can acquire by doing good things so that they may have a good and respectable life. Topic 2 Compare and contrast Mill and Kant on the question of moral obligation. In particular, explain and explore the differences between them on matters of the relevance of an action’s consequences to its rightness or wrongness. Moral obligation is a term that describes a belief thatRead MoreKant And Mill On Animal Ethics Essay1365 Words   |  6 PagesIn this essay I will begin by explaining the overall views of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill, then compare and contrast the ideas and philosophies of Kant and Mill on Animal Ethics. I believe that Kant, the deontologist, will not care as much about the duty/responsibility between humans and animals as Mill, the utilitarian, who will see the extreme importance of animal ethics. After studying and explaining the views and teachings of these two philosophers I will see if my thesis was correct,Read MoreThe Moral Dispute Of John Stuart Mill And Immanuel Kant1500 Words   |  6 Pagespath is taking the most ethical path rendering reward with heaven. Aristotle’s theory and argument will be explored further in this review along with the works of some of his successors. The Moral Dispute John Stuart Mill vs Immanuel Kant Philosopher John Stuart Mill’s theory highlights utilitarianism and Kantian theory would be the total opposite. Mill’s position links happiness with morality and focused solely on the outcomes of an action. Philosopher John Kant’s theory emphasizesRead MoreThe Differences Between Moral Motivation1390 Words   |  6 PagesThe differences between moral motivation in Groundworks and Utilitarianism Among the history of moral philosophy, two major philosophers, Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill from the 18th and 19th century have come up with two different moral theories for the moral philosophy. Kant had established his view of moral in his bookâ€Å"The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of morals† and claimed that motivation of an actions are based on duty and reason. On the other hand, Mill’s idea is that actions base