Difference Between Kant And John Stuart Mill

1474 Words6 Pages
(a) Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill are the opposing philosophers Immanuel Kant’s work was based on the Grounding for Metaphysics of Morals and John Stuart Mill based his views on utilitarianism .This papers is going to elaborate on their impact of their philosophy for humanity at large. DIFFERENCES OF ETHICS IN KANT AND MILL John Stuart Mill based his views on utilitarianism .He notes that one must do the greatest good for a greatest number on the other hand Kant is not for that idea .He argues that individuals must not be sacrificed for the majority; in other words the minority must not suffer at the expense of the majority. -all human beings are equal. Furthermore, John Stuart Mill values consequences .He argues that we must value consequences.…show more content…
Rousseau agues that a social contract would create classis within the society. Both Locke and Mill argue that people have to cede power to on authority.Mill states that one should to the greatest good for a greatest number. If the government fails to deliver political goods to the society the people have got right to throw the government out of office this is what Locke argues Rousseau states that a revolution will bring anarchy there mustn’t be a revolution…show more content…
For Kant a moral good is everyone’s mandate. Individual according to Kant are expected to do good all the time for the benefit of everyone .It is a duty for every individual to do good all the time .AS propounded by Kant before any action , a person should first consider the other person , for every action of an individual should benefit or should not conflict with the happiness of another person .Unlike Kant, Mill considered a collective approach ,whereby he focused more on the benefit of the greatest number of people .According to Mill ,it is the pleasure enjoyed by a greatest number of people that an action can be considered a moral good .Utility is considered a moral if it benefit a large number of people .The benefits which pleasures the people is the sole determinate of the morality of that action
Show More
Related

  • Aristotle Vs Hobbes

    1877 Words  | 8 Pages

    that there may be functions that differ between the two halves. He also found that the hemispheres are connected to the spine separately, and on opposite sides. This discovery gave a reasoning behind the pre-existing knowledge that when one’s brain is injured on one side, motor or sensory problems can occur on the other side of the body by suggesting that each side of the brain controls different and opposite sides of the body. These hemispherical differences support a broader idea of localization

    Read More

  • Normative Ethical Theory Research Paper

    1502 Words  | 7 Pages

    Mankind wants justification for their actions. They also desire to know how to decide if something is morally permissible or not. A normative ethical theory explores and explains the difference between what makes right acts right and wrong acts wrong. My normative ethical theory is: An act is right if it honors God and what He has created and wrong if it dishonors God and what He has created. Even though my theory talks about acts, acts are not the way to get to heaven. Jesus is the only way to get

    Read More

More about Difference Between Kant And John Stuart Mill

Open Document