Question

Explain the difference between Hume's ethics of ends and Kants ethics of means. Please explain in a few detailed paragraphs.

Answer 1

Hume’s stance on ethics was that there is no place for reason in the basic operations of ethics. Ethics is an area of emotion, dealing with what we find agreeable and disagreeable depending upon its moral correctness. Reason can only play a subordinate role here, i.e. once the feelings have set the basic goal, the means to achieve that can be found. Reason can therefore help decipher whether our factual judgments are false. He felt that ethics should be based on what is useful in that situation. He developed the position that mental behaviour is governed by customs are our use of induction. For example, our actions are justified only by our idea of observable causes and effects. Individuals are a product of their experiences and environment according to his philosophical stance.

Kant’s ideas were similar, yet different in many ways. Kant said that rational human beings should be treated as an end in themselves and not as a means to something else. The fact that we are human has value in itself according to him. An individual’s inherent value therefore does not depend on anything external. We exist, therefore we have value. Hume’s world view was more critical in this domain, wherein he questioned the ideas of choices and the different cause and effect they may have in order to decipher the moral correctness of a person.