Question

Compare and contrast the early utilitarian ethics of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill with either the virtue ethics of Aristotle or the deontological ethics of Immanuel Kant. What does each approach to ethics say about what its proponents think ethics is? How are the approaches alike and different? What are the implications of each approach for lived experience?

Answer 1

Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill both advocated Utilitarian ethics that maximizes utility which is happiness. They suggest that an ethical action should be measured against its outcome. So, the action should bring more happiness to more people and at the same time reducing harm.

Immanuel Kant is the proponent of Deontological Ethics and Deon means duty, so no matter what the outcome is, one should fulfil one’s duties. He also suggests that one should act to a maxim so as to make it universal law for others to follow. He suggests not to use people to achieve one’s goals but to respect humanity thus suggesting do to others what you want others to do for you.

Both the theories are opposite to each other because one suggests duty or action over its outcomes and the other suggests outcome over the actions. In real life it depends on which situation one applies this. For example a soldier at the war front need to kill the enemy soldiers in order to fulfil his duty for the nation and all over the world it’s considered as an acceptable action. If we look at this action from the one who was killed by him, he is a cold blooded murderer.