The Kantian Ethics - Essay Example

Kant is known for his theory that there is a single moral obligation, which is called the categorical imperative that is derived from the concept of duty. He believed that the moral law is a principle of reason itself and is not based on contingent facts about the world such as what would make us happy, but to act upon the moral law, which has not other motive than "worthiness of being happy." Utilitarianism is the ethical doctrine that the moral worth of an action is solely determined by its contribution to overall utility. From the principle of utility pain and pleasure are the only intrinsic values in the world. From this, the rule of utility is derived that the good is whatever brings the greatest happiness to the greater number of people. Most utilitarian theories deal with producing the greater amount of good for the greatest number. Negative utilitarianism requires individuals to promote the least amount of evil or harm, or to prevent the greatest amount of harm for the greatest number of the masses. Since utilitarians judge all actions by their ability to maximize good consequences, any harm to one individual can often be justified by a greater gain to other individuals. Values can be used under certain conditions since they can be used in times of evil or good. Goodwill is intrinsically good; its value is wholly self-contained and independent of its external relations. The value of goodwill does not depend upon the results. The moral value of the action can only reside in a formal principle 'maxim' the general commitment to act in this way because it is one's duty. The ultimate principle of morality is a moral law conceived so abstractly that it is capable of guiding a person to the right action to every set of circumstances1. Formula of autonomy where the concern of human dignity is combined with the principle of universiability to produce a conception of the moral law for the good of all2. Moral theory was founded on the assumption that it is the consequences of human actions that count in evaluating their merit that the kind of consequences that matter for human happiness is just the achievement of pleasure and avoidance of pain. The hedonistic value of any human action is calculated by how intense, how long the pleasure lasts, how certain and how quickly it follows the performance of the action being done and how likely it will give more benefits than harm. The extent of this pleasure brings out the happiness of the community as a whole because it is the sum of each person's interest as an individual. The universal agreement motivates people to do the right thing on the role of moral sanctions in eliciting proper conduct from human beings3. Human beings are also motivated by such internal sanctions such as self-esteem, guilt and conscience because we all have the social feelings on behalf of others, the selfish wish for the good of all may make us act morally. To avoid feeling bad and blaming oneself, people prefer to act morally to avoid the guilt within themselves if they act otherwise. People desire happiness hence when one person desire his/her happiness it implies that individual human beings desire the happiness of each other and everyone as a whole. Social applications of the principle of utility are fully consistent with concern for the promotion of justice, which involves respect for property, rights of individual citizens. Individual human beings are responsible for their thoughts, feelings, tastes and pursuits, while society is properly concerned only with social interest. To see that this is adhered to by everyone, the state has to monitor the individual interest so that they prevent individuals from doing harm to others by violating their rights. Utilitarianism therefore can only attain its goal of greater happiness by cultivating the nobleness of the individuals so that all benefit for the good of others. Once many people acquire the happiness they were pursuing or were entitled to, they develop inclinations. They do not mind if one achieves the happiness what they are concerned about is the prospect of success of attaining this happiness. Happiness in the utilitarian sense is the avoidance of suffering. In utilitarianism, the consequentialist moral theory is one, which holds that the evaluation of outcome of affair is more fundamental, that is the good is fundamental than evaluation of actions, which is right. Consequentialism holds that the rightness or wrongness of an action is defined in terms of the goodness or badness of state of affairs. Utilitarianism attends to provide something like algorithm or decision procedure for moral problems. Whereby the action open to a person must be determined, also determine who will be affected by the action, calculate the consequences of each action for the happiness of each person affected get the action with the most happiness as a result and perform it. Utility is defined as pleasure and absence of pain hence the name greatest happiness principle. Pleasure and absence of pain are the only things desirable as an end in themselves. An event is only desirable if it is a source of such pleasure, actions are good when they lead to a higher level of general happiness and bad when they lead to a lower level of the same. With reference to various theories of ethics that is Kant and Utilitarianism discuss the role of ethics in business organizations. The company with the original formula of drug X is more concerned with making profit than to the greater good of the people as a whole. The generic drug will be useful to a lot of people and not the wealthy people only, who are few. Utilitarianism should be the driving force by this company producing the generic drug because the action of manufacturing these drugs and making them cheaper so that a lot of people can be able to afford them will lead to producing the greatest amount of good to a lot of people. The action being carried out by the company which has purchased the rights of manufacturing the generic drug will be able to maximize good consequences and at the end this action will lead to a greater gain to other individuals who could not have afforded the drug if the company which has rights for the original drug was manufacturing it because it could have been expensive and accessible to the few wealthy individuals. The company manufacturing the generic drug if it uses the utilitarianism theory their actions will lead to a lot of people acquiring the happiness they were pursuing or were entitled to as now they can be cured by use of this drug, which is affordable than the original drug. The issue of profits is important to the original company but happiness in utilitarian sense is the avoidance of suffering hence the company manufacturing the generic drug at the end of everything will have made a lot of people happy by prevention of their suffering. The disease has led to a lot of people dying but since the introduction of the generic drug, most people can live comfortable in happiness, as the drugs are affordable and easily accessible. The company manufacturing the generic drug going by the consequential moral theory is the one, which holds that the evaluation of an outcome of an affair is more fundamental than the evaluation of action. The company manufacturing the original drug, which is expensive is more concerned with the evaluation of action, which to them, is to get more profits. In this scenario, the good thing to do is best than the right thing. Hence the company manufacturing the generic drug, which is cheaper, is doing the good thing instead of the right thing. This action will lead to a lot of people being cured hence avoidance of suffering will be minimal. If the company with the original drug was to sell it, it would be expensive to many people to buy it and considering it's an epidemic which has killed a lot of people. The disease has become a source of unhappiness for the people hence if the drug was to be manufactured cheaply by another company it would be the ultimate good for many people which utilitarianism theory advocates for. Going by Kant theory, which is derived from the concept of duty where he believes that the moral law is a principle of reason itself and is not based on contingent facts about the world such as what would make us happy hence the worthiness of being happy. If the company manufacturing the generic drug is making it possible for a lot of people to afford it not only to the wealthy few in the country but to the greater mass hence this is a good thing. Since utilitarians judge all their actions by their ability to maximize good consequences, any harm to one individual can often be justified by greater gain to other individuals. Taking this company with rights for the original drug, them losing in terms of money will be okay according to utilitarians because if the other company is sold for the rights of manufacturing the generic drugs which will be affordable to many people and hence end up assisting many people. These masses of people could have died if the original company had continued manufacturing the drug, which in this case could have been expensive. The value of good will does not depend upon the results at the end of the day the people who will have been assisted by this generic drug will have attained their happiness. The company manufacturing the generic drug are more concerned with the individual human beings desire as they are fulfilling the happiness of each and every person be it a wealthy person or any other person who cannot afford the drugs when they are expensive. At this point the company is more concerned with the happiness of everyone as a whole. Work Cited Hare, J. E. The Moral Gap: Kantian Ethics, Human Limits, and God's Assistance. Oxford: Charendon Press, 1996. Read More