You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
Reconstruct/Explain/Criticize an argument
Pages 4 (1004 words)
First Name, Last Name: Professor/Tutor: Course Title: Date of Submission: Introduction Kant’s philosophy draws its basis from the universal rule that a majority of people call the golden rule and that is one should do to other people what they expect people to do back.
It is a theory that argues against the means; happiness in this case, justifies the end. According to Kant, people should not be judged by the consequences of their action, which is to mean that the results of an action should not apply in determining whether something is right or wrong. Thus, according to Kant, the motives the person had behind their actions ought to be used to measure whether an act is right or wrong. Utilitarianism, on the other hand, is a discipline of thought that argues that the result of an action ought to justify the means through which the end was achieved. This theory is a consequential theory based on the universal aggregate happiness. That is to state that, utilitarianism focuses on maximizing utility of any action, or doing what causes most pleasure to as many as possible, with less suffering to the majority. This theory is in complete contrast to Kant’s theory that many refer to as deontological. That is to mean that one’s actions ought to be guided by moral principles and duty, and not the consequences of the action. In summary, Kant believes that people do what is right because it is the right course of action regardless of the consequences; while utilitarianism states that it is the good consequences that drive people do what is right. Question One 1. ...
Not exactly what you need?