Discuss the Relevance of kant's utilitarian theory?

Answer 1

Kant did not have a utilitarian theory but rather a categorical imperative that utilitarians have attempted to link to Kant's theory of categorical imperative in order to reconcile the flaws that come with their own theory. Utilitarianism comes in many forms such as John Stuart Mills theory of utilitarianism, but the for the purposes of this answer we will only discuss the ethical theory behind utilitarianism. In that regard, utilitarianism theorizes that the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its contribution to happiness or pleasure as summed up by the whole of humanity. Machiavelli, while not a utilitarian, had actually stated this in his manifesto the Prince, only he stated it as such: "The end justifies the means." This as an ethical theory is problematic and any ethical being knows full well that the end does not justify the means but rather it is the means that justify the end.

Kant had no regard for the utilitarian theory and because of that formulated a dentological moral system to counter the utilitarianism of his day. Kant had argued that hypothetical moral systems do not persuade people to act moral because they are concerned with the outcome as a whole and do little to instruct an individual why it is in their best interest to behave morally. This dentologicalc moral system was based on his own categorical imperative which supposes that morality can be summed up in one assertion of reason. Kant defined imperative as any action or inaction that of one that is necessary. A categorical imperative then makes an unconditional requirement to behave in such a way that it is an end in and of itself rather than a justification of that end. He stated this as such:

"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."

The major problem with Kant's theory, although much more sound than that of utilitarianism, is in the notion that we can will universal law. We, of course, can no more will gravity than we can will the speed of light and the act of murder is not wrong because we as humanity have willed it so, it is wrong because it disparaged the right of that who was murdered to life. The law of murder is universal and applies on distant planets the same as it does here, just like gravity or the speed of light.

The major problem with the ethical theory behind utilitarianism is in defining ethics as either happiness or pleasure. While happiness is indeed a moral duty it is not morality in and of itself. Pleasure, on the other hand is not a moral duty but rather a biological command to seek that which pleasures us. Sex, drugs and rock and roll can give many people pleasure but has nothing to do with morality or ethics. Out of control orgies where carnal knowledge is gained with people we have no knowledge of is not only not an ethical theory it is just plain dangerous for more than just the parties involved and as such and as pleasure it has no place in an ethical framework

Answer 2

Kant's ethical theory focuses on duty and moral obligation, emphasizing the importance of respecting individual rights and following moral principles regardless of consequences. Utilitarianism, on the other hand, prioritizes the greatest happiness for the greatest number, often leading to trade-offs in individual rights. While both theories offer valuable insights into ethical decision-making, Kant's focus on duty provides a strong foundation for respecting human dignity and rights in moral dilemmas.