Kant and Mill Ideologies Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Kant and Mill Ideologies - Essay ExampleIndeed, Mill claims that flock should appreciate the regulation of utility as a tool that derives secondary moral rules, which get along general happiness. The unfathomed principle of morality means that happiness is intended pleasure and absence of pain where right actions promote happiness while wrong actions produce the reverse of happiness, which is unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure. As such, we can judge pecks actions based on the secondary principles, which promote general happiness. On the other hand, Immanuel Kant defines the unplumbed principle of morality as the Categorical Imperative which basis moral requirements on a standard of rationality. He refers to the fundamental principle of morality as the law of an autonomous will where moral reasons atomic number 18 imperative to any other reason. Ideally, one formulation of Kants Categorical Imperative encourages individuals to act on a motivational thought that one can consistently urge the society to adopt as a universal law as it will derive equal worth and equal respect. Notably, the Mill and Kants fundamental principle of morality differ. Indeed, Mill abhors the utilitarian, which defines general happiness as a secondary moral principle that refers to happiness as intended pleasure and absence of pain, while Kant defines moral requirements and moral worthiness as acts of good will.... Indeed, Will objects to the idea that pleasure is the only good, it is the highest good, and it is universal (Booher 1). He claims that there are things that people consider and that there are differences in meter and qualities of pleasure where certain pleasures are more desired and valuable than others in relation to moral deliberations (Booher 1). Notably, Mills objection to the argument against utilitarianism should reckon the manifest value that pleasures attract with higher pleasures having more value than lower pleasures. It should also disting uish between the quantity and quality of pleasure as well as favor some activities as being reveal than others are. More so, his argument should address the problems that relate to differentiating quantities and qualities of pleasure. Ideally, Mills account of higher pleasures answers the objection by demonstrating that certain pleasures are better and valuable than others (Booher 1). It also negates the idea that pleasure is highest natural good and confirms that higher pleasure is the canonic principle of ethics, and the foundation of morality. According to Mill, gay beings are different from non-human animals in a morally evoke way. Ideally, Mil noted that animals are irrational and are not self-aware or did not make cognitive capabilities as human beings. As such, he established that human beings are different from animals because human beings can experience mental pleasures and interestingly prefer mental pleasure to body pleasures (John undertake Mill 1). He supports thi s by asserting that individuals who enjoy all pleasures qualify as the only judge who equally crave for mental pleasures.