Kant Vs Utilitarian Theory

Name
Institution
Course
Date
Mill versus Kant
Mill believes that to create any philosophic theory; it is important to appeal to pre-philosophic practices. The pre-philosophic practices are grounded on taking particular things to be reasonably believed or to be desirable. For example, if x1, x2, x3 up to xn add up to P, then, there is enough reason to believe that xn+1 is equal to P. Further, a sensation is generally pleasurable and that there is reason to yearn for that sensation hence delivering higher utilitarianism. However, the crucial question is if the reasons recognized reflect the actual structure of the world or the real structure of value and how should individuals defend everyday reason? Kant, in a similar relationship, offers possible

Utilitarianism makes ethical decisions based on the results that the action will cause. However, for the Kantian theory, it is believed that human reason is the only pure good, and they disregard the consequences. Kant discusses that the mentioned human reason should be devoid of the influence of desires or emotions. This opposes the Utilitarian view that ignores motives of an action as not important and approves the consequences. According to Kant, a purely good act is performed due to the person’s obligation to the categorical imperative. On the contrary, utilitarianism states that a good ethical decision is gauged by the amount of pleasure that the act

For example, Kant would consider a murder wrong because it goes contrary to the demands of practical reason. However, utilitarianism would examine the context of the murder to determine whether the murder under consideration produces a higher level of pleasure for the affected people. In this case, murdering of terrorists is considered right by the utilitarian theory. The debate between Mill and Kant is based on whether duty can be compromised with an appeal to consequences. In this case would killing a person be justified if it benefits many people than it harms. According to Kant, Killing is not justified in any situation even if the person is a mugger or a dictator. The disadvantage of Kant’s theory is that it fails to account for the particular context in which an act is