Moral Philosophy

Morals and ethics is, of course, a subject that runs deep in the discussion of philosophy. People are faced with moral dilemmas everyday, which many times society decides without thoroughly exploring their options. Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, Plato, and Aristotle are philosophers that focus on the topic of ethics, yet all have different outlooks.

At the very heart of John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism is a concern which can be traced back to the Biblical parable of the house built on sand - an improper foundation. With this in mind, Mill audaciously sets out to develop a "foundational program" of morality, one that incorporates a principle that can be the basis for all other moral thinking. To find this foundational principle, the naturalistic Mill examines the common, fundamental beliefs of humanity. Mill finds his foundation in the statement that "pleasure and freedom from pain are the only things desirable as ends" (Mill, 1974). While it is possible to bolster such a statement with rational supporting arguments, Mill accepts that there can be no definite "proof", necessitating that it be both intuitive and, with some explanation, self-evident. A thorough understanding of this statement (and its slightly less self-evident role as the foundation of the most influential moral theory of the 19th century) is crucial, as its effect on Mill's moral outlook as a whole is impossible to overstate.

Kant is considered a non-consequentiality, which means he feels the intentions motives, and good will is more important than the results or consequences of an action. The backbone of Kant's philosophy is the belief in the fundamental freedom of the individual. Kant did not indicate anarchy, but the idea of self-government and the creation and obedience of universal laws. He believed the moral value of an action is assessed not from the purpose of the action, but from the "maxim" from which the action springs. He defines a maxim as personal policy in the cause-effect framework. Kant said that a person should only act on these maxims that could be willed into universal laws. In order to create a universal law, the action must be done out of good will or a pure hearted motive. Kant felt that you cannot do something wrong from a right motive. A person should act because it is the right thing to do and for no other reason. In addition, the motive must be related when considering moral value. A person should not be given credit for committing a morally valuable act when they did it only for the reward. Kant even rejects unselfish motives because to act solely for the happiness of others suggest that if our actions did not always evoke happiness then we would have no obligation to do it.

Kant focused more on the motives and intentions of an action to measure value, where Mill focuses more on the ultimate end of the action. Mill's principle states that an action is "right" in relation to how it promotes happiness. Mill felt that happiness is desirable enough ...