The perspective of Immanuel Kant seems quite different. It is focused on duty and an appreciable extent of obligation (Dark, 2010). He appears to believe that every human being is faced with a responsibility to the right thing in situations where he or she needs to make an ethical decision. This is based on the premise of moral law, which means that Kant adopts a legalistic point of view in theorizing morality. In this regard, Kant draws heavily on the power of reason, as opposed to that of character. Mill adopts a slightly similar perspective.
He believes that morality boils down to what is good for all – an approach to classical utilitarianism. The perspective is focused on propagating the idea that what is moral and ethical is what benefits the most people in society. Having understood the different perspective as presented by the three philosophers, it is important to discuss them in the context of the extent to which they resonate with me. First, I would mention that, as a person, I believe that the ultimate power that can help in the accomplishment the wellbeing of the entire society is character. An important understanding that I have come to deduce from the things I have learned through the diverse experiences I have had is that, while it is important to facilitate the overall success and wellbeing of the community, this goal is not possible to accomplish unless the right values are propagated. People, as individuals within the society, have to share common beliefs, attitudes, and values in an effort for them to behave in the same way for the benefit of all (Kurzynski, 2012). With this in mind, I believe that we make ethical decisions based on what they believe is right, which results in the overall wellbeing of the rest of the society.
As such, I believe that the perspectives of Kant and Mill are fundamentally informed by the premise of virtue, which amounts to character. In addition, it is possible, though not very