Monday, October 02, 2006

 

Kant vs. Utilitarianism

I think that Kant's moral principles are much more believable and applicable than those of utilitarianism. Honestly, I don't believe that every morally obligatory action is that which brings about the most happiness. What makes one person happy does not make another person happy, so really, what sort of underlying fundamental theory can utilitarianism be? Since happiness is not the same for everyone at once, why not just subscribe to relativism, write off morality entirely, and be done with it?

However, Kant's philosophy relies on the fact that everyone is equal, and as equals all rational beings should be subject to the same morality. In the real world, we know that not everyone DOES in fact subject themselves to the same moral code as everyone else, but Kant says we SHOULD. I think this concept is closer to the actual idea of morality than just trying to bring about the most happiness. Not that happiness is not desirable, but no one is happy all the time. Besides, not every morally correct action will bring about the MOST happiness, and utilitarianism is all about the maximization of happiness. Sometimes the RIGHT thing to do is not always the thing that will make everyone happy, and this brings us full circle to the argument in class today about lying. You can draw your own conclusions about whether you'd rather lie if it's going to make people happy or tell the truth even if it hurts, but I agree with Kant in this whole-heartedly.

Comments: Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?