Kantianism and Utilitarianism, Kantianism is an action is only good as long as it doesn’t violate the rule logic. For example, what if people lied all the time then there would be no truth in this world. Utilitarianism is the belief that an action is good or not depend on if the result good or not? For example, if you had to take the life of a serial killer in order to save a bunch of people even though someone died, they are still happy based on the theory of utilitarianism it states that the act is right.
Kantianism doesn’t think the rightness of the act depends on consequences. But, the rightness of an act depends on acting on a maxim so therefore you can say that one can consistently will as a universal law. So basically, Kant’s was trying to at is that if you want to do something and you aren’t all the sure if it is alright to do, first you would have to ask how the world would turn out if everyone does what I am about to do. If everyone commits the act, but the result is that the act in question unfortunately no longer makes any sense or even serves any purpose in the world, then the act is not morally legitimate.
Say For example, what if I had to run a red light because I am in a hurry for something kinda, so how would I feel if everyone is able to run red lights. Then wouldn’t be much of a point of having streetlights because nobody would follow them. Forget able getting to where you need to be on time you would be able to go anywhere because of danger of running red light and not having a chance to get through because everyone is running a red light. But that world wouldn’t make sense or serve any purpose only thing it’ll do is cause a car crash and traffic would be stopped up anyone, so you’ll be back to square one.
A utilitarian would allow anytime of crime most horrendous thing you could think of as long as it can produce the best outcome for the majority. For example, Robin Hood, He stole from the rich in order to give their goods to the poor. What Robin Hood did made a lot of people happy at the cost of a small amount of wealthy people. But he was able to maximize the amount of good, pleasure, and utility from what he did. Some might that is utilitarian might say that Robin Hood’s action was justified, but a Kantianism might say that stealing is wrong because if everyone stole nobody would have anything because they would continuously get stolen from like an infinite loop.
Differing from Kantianism that focuses on is the outcome logical utilitarianism has no use for such things because you judge each situation independently like you voting at an election. So, for each situation you have to gauge every situation and think will this make the majority happy or not, because it doesn’t have any guidelines to follow like Kantianism you have to think hard about the actions you commit before you do them. Even if you do and get the results you want you won’t really know if what you did was the best action to take. Utilitarianism refers to whether an action is ethically correct if the results of that action are more preferable. Correct moral behavior is determined by analyzation of said person action’s and the outcome. Utilitarianism needs the unification of both the bad and good consequences of said action. Then you’ll be able to determine whether the good beats the bad. If the results outweigh the bad then the action is correct, but if the bad are greater then the action is morally improper.
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. You can order our professional work here.