Compare Utilitarianism With Kant's Theory of The Categorical Imperative And Explain Which You Think Is The Best To Use For Moral Decision Making.

Authors Avatar

Religious Studies                                                                                Date: 11/07/2008

Compare Utilitarianism With Kant’s Theory of The Categorical Imperative And Explain Which You Think Is The Best To Use For Moral Decision Making.

Both Utilitarianism and Kant’s theory of the Categorical Imperative provide people with a moral structure, from which to make moral decisions. However, both of them have benefits and flaws, and thus – as they contradict each other in many ways – it is difficult to decide which is the most suitable with regards everyday life decision making. To enable one to decide, it is vital to first understand the basic principles involved in each and to then compare the advantages and disadvantages each offer, which is going to be the main body of this essay.

Utilitarianism has been split into two forms, as many struggled to accept the basic idea without some elaboration. Act Utilitarianism was Bentham’s idea, and it contrasts quite considerably to Mill’s idea of Rule Utilitarianism. Both follow the principle that they should be applied in all situations – with no exceptions – or though the principles they are actually applying varies. Act Utilitarianism states that, in every situation, we should make our moral decisions based upon the outcome – the moral choice being that which brings about the greatest good to the greatest number. Rule Utilitarianism, on the other hand, focuses upon a set of general rules that everyone should follow in order to bring about good for the community.

The best example to use, when comparing the two, is an instance of lying. For example, a terrified child runs into a shop and hides under the counter, and shortly afterwards, a mad man, who is angry and carrying a knife also enters the shop. The man asks you if you have seen the child, and through his aggressive attitude you are sure that he intends to cause harm to the child. But, should you reveal the child’s location, or not? Act Utilitarianism would conclude that lying to the man, despite that in itself being an immoral action, would bring about the greatest good, as the child would be protected. Thus, in this situation, lying would be the correct moral action to choose. However, Rule Utilitarianism states that lying is always wrong, as generally it does not bring about good for the community. Therefore, it would be immoral to deceive to the man, in this case, and thus, one should tell him where the child is.

Join now!

Kant’s theory of the Categorical Imperative contrasts greatly to the principle of Utilitarianism – with Utilitarianism you act in such a way that will bring about the greatest good for the greatest number, whereas, with the Categorical Imperative, you are intended to act a certain way because it is your duty to do so. Unlike Utilitarianism, which relies upon teleological thinking, to correctly do ones duty, one must make decisions whilst excluding the influences of the actions’ effects, and our own inclinations. Thus, one must think in a deontological thinker, to a certain extent. Also, in order to make ...

This is a preview of the whole essay