$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
This paper discusses various Utilitarian views and their criticisms. It looks at how the basic view of Utilitarian ethics, which was first presented in the nineteenth century, is that ethics are not based on pure reason, like Immanuel Kant maintained, and that ethics are not based on feelings and intuitions, as David Hume asserted. It concludes that there is a definite distinction between Hume's moral ethics and the Utilitarian's since the Utilitarian places only the consequences into the moral code. It also looks at how a Utilitarian will betray a friend if she feels that the consequences will result in greater happiness than pain and how Kantian and Humean ethicists will not.
From the Paper:"In order to further understand Mill's justification, let's take a look at what Mill had to say about pleasure and the Utilitarian. "According to the Greatest Happiness Principle ... the ultimate end, with reference to and for the sake of which all other things are desirable (whether we are considering our own good or that of other people), is an existence exempt as far as possible from pain, and as rich as possible in enjoyments, both in point of quantity and quality; the test of quality, and the rule for measuring it against quantity, being the preference felt by those who in their opportunities of experience, to which must be added their habits of self-consciousness and self-observation, are best furnished with the means of comparison. This, being, according to the Utilitarian opinion, the end of human action, is necessarily also the standard of morality; which may accordingly be defined, the rules and precepts for human conduct, by the observance of which an existence such as has been described might be, to the greatest extent possible, secured to all mankind, and not to them only, but, so far as the nature of things admits, to the whole sentient creation..." (Mill, 1863, Emphases Mine)."
Sample of Sources Used:
- Beverman, V. (n.d.) Contrasts between Kantianism and Utilitarianism. Retrieved August 16, 2006 from: http://220.127.116.11/search?q=cache:kyc0qF1_hDQJ:philosophy.tamu.edu/~b-everman/victor/moral/Kant_Lecture.pdf+contrasts+between+kantianism+and+utilitarianism&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1
- BLTC. (n.d.). Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mills, chapter two (1863). Retrieved August 16, 2006 from: http://www.utilitarianism.com/mill2.htm
- Darwall, S. (n.d.) History of Modern Ethics. Retrieved on August 16, 2006 from: http://www.la.utexas.edu/research/poltheory/darwall/histeth/histeth.lec29.html
- Leadership and Ethics. (n.d.). Kant: the categorical imperative directs the course of duty. Retrieved August 16, 2006 from: http://18.104.22.168/search?q=cache:p40n5gmgtz0J:navsci.berkeley.edu/ns412/Topics/Kant/kant.ppt+kant+utilitarian+ethics&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=11
- Waller, B.N. (2005) Consider ethics: Theory, readings, and contemporary issues. (1st Ed.). New York: Pearson/Longman
Cite this Comparison Essay:
Teleological Ethics (2008, September 11) Retrieved October 21, 2020, from https://www.academon.com/comparison-essay/teleological-ethics-107722/
"Teleological Ethics" 11 September 2008. Web. 21 October. 2020. <https://www.academon.com/comparison-essay/teleological-ethics-107722/>