Kant and Mill

Paper Summary:

This paper compares John S. Mill's theory of utilitarianism to Immanuel Kant's deontological theory. The paper discusses Kant's theory that the promotion of the happiness of others could only be an imperfect duty. The paper contrasts this with Mill's belief that the moral worth of actions should be judged by the consequences produced.

From the Paper:

"Immanuel Kant's deontological theory of morality approaches the question of duties and rights through the lens of the rational nature of the moral subject. Thus, the appeal of Kantian theory lies in its recognition of the intrinsic worth and absolute dignity of human beings (Grisez, p. 125). In fact, Kant's emphasis on individual worth and dignity partly explains his assertion that we only have an imperfect duty to promote the happiness of others, and that too, as long as it does not violate the categorical imperative. Kant's assertion, however, is more fully explained by the fact that he derived his classification of duties from his categorical imperative that there were certain actions that were wrong irrespective of whether such actions increased the total amount of happiness in the world (Hudelson, p. 76-77). It is evident that Kant's reasoning was derived from the need to protect the freedom and dignity of human beings."

More papers on Kant and Mill:

• Comparison Essay # 138066 : "A Comparison/Contrast of Kant and Mill with Regards to Happiness"
• Comparison Essay # 102606 : "The Ethical Arguments of Kant and Mill"
• Term Paper # 97755 : "Kant and Mill"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: