John Stuart Mills Ethical Theory Of Utilitarianism Philosophy Essay

John Stuart Mills Ethical Theory Of Utilitarianism ism EssayJohn Stuart Mill be harpved in an ethical theory know as utilitarianism and his theory is establish on the principle of giving the sterling(prenominal) triumph to greatest number of unwashedwealth, Mill support the pursuit of happiness. On the other(a) hand, Kant who believed in an ethical theory cognize as Deontologist and he believes that only principle of actions matter and incorrupt decisions should be made based on atomic number 53 duties and remedy of others.Utilitarianism believes the chastely right actions are those actions that maximise the sport and minimize the pain. Utilitarianism thinks the consequence of an action justifies the honourable acceptability of gist taken to reach that end and the result of actions outweigh any other considerations. In other words, they believe that end justifies the means. Utilitarianism believes an action is chastely right if it results in pleasure whereas it is wr ong if it each(prenominal)ows rise to pain.Utilitarianism believes sacrificing one reality to bear on thousands is okay because you maximize the happiness of whole community or the world. For utilitarianism consequences of actions matter, so right action maximize the amount of happiness. Utilitarianism does not consider in- person relationship. For instance, there is fire and in this fire there is your son and a person who after part cure cancer who depart burn to the death, utilitarianism leave say save the person who can cure the cancer because he give save all patients who have cancer and it will maximize the happiness in the world. According to utilitarianism, it is out duty to help people without worrying about consequences, for example, Mills thinks we should do charities as much as we can without having affected or injure on ourselves because giving benevolence will give maximize pleasure and minimize pain. Mills ethical view links happiness with morals because it makes sense with common beliefs about morality for example utilitarianism backs up murder is wrong. There are few act that are not good according to utilitarianism much(prenominal) as selfless act, for instance beating up wife gives pleasure to men where wife is selfless so this act is not morally right and good for utilitarianism.Sometimes utilitarianism require us to commit morally reprehensible acts for instance, there is a terrorist who has a nuclear weapon aimed at your city and at the same time you have access to the kidskin of insane terrorist, you can extort the child so you can write down the terrorist to stop his action. In situation like this, utilitarianism might say to torture the child so you can save the whole city point though it is not morally right to torture small child. I think the major problem with utilitarianism in defining ethics as either happiness or pleasure is that happiness is a moral duty and it is not morality in and of itself. While pleasure is not a moral duty but rather a biologic command to seek that which pleasure us, for example drugs, sex, music can give us pleasure but they have nothing to do with morality or ethics.On the other hand, Kant believed in an ethical theory known as Deontology that focus on the concept of duty rather than on any concept of right or wrong. His theory emphasize on the type of action rather than consequences of that action. Kant believes that moral decisions should be based on one duties and right of others and we should act morally regardless of consequences and act is considered moral if it is done for the sake of duty. For instance, a homeless man with brain damage in accident is brought to hospital and doctor realize that he does not have any families but deontologist will save man sustenance as it is his duty to cover up a patients. Utilitarianism might say allow man die and use his organ to save as many another(prenominal) people as possible to maximize the happiness of the world . However, according to deontologist allowing the man to die would not make that decision justify.Kant believe that well cosmos of each person should be an end to in itself and we should never treat someone as simple a means but incessantly as a means to an end. According to Kant, moral rules are commands and it is demanded by reason and free person acts on reason and does not relent attention to influences that are nor rational. For example, there should not be any excommunication to moral rules or laws, therefore, it is wrong to kill people in all situations even in self defense that apply to eachone in every situation.Kant believes that consequences do not matter because act of our consequences are not endlessly in our control and things do not turn out, as we want. However, we can control our motives and the motives to what is right gives an act its moral worth. Kant believes we should use our morals as a guide when making decisions, for instance, there are four patients i n the hospital that needs different organ to survive, and a regular person comes to the hospital for regular check up. According to utilitarianism, it is better to sacrifice one man to save others because it will maximize the happiness but deontologist will say it is immoral to kill an innocent person to maximize the happiness and we should not use person as a tool. Another release between these two theories in situation like lie, Kant believes we should not lie in any circumstances because it is morally wrong and to lie it will make a person a means to an end which is not good. However, utilitarianism will say that it is okay to lie if it maximizes the happiness.