![]() ![]() Pure philosophy of morals (metaphysics) may be distinguished from theĪpplied (viz. In the following footnote from the Grundlegung Kant relates this idea in a thankfully straightforward manner: That is to say, regardless of anyone's opinions or feelings about the world there is always an objectively correct course of action in morally relevant affairs. Under universal prescriptivism, if a person would still prescribe an action were they to find themselves utterly in the situation of any of the affected agents said person is morally justified in prescribing the action.įor Kant, morality is ontologically independent of our thoughts about it. Hare's universal prescriptivism morality is a human construct that is subject to the rules of logical consistency. For Mill, morality is established through consideration of the utility to humankind of any given action. In contrast to Kantian ethics, the nature of morality in Mill's formulation of utilitarianism does not require an appeal to absolute ethical truths separate from situational applications. ![]() Kant gives us various formulations of his rule of the categorical imperative which is, Kant believes, wholly derived from rational thought. One can arrive at these truths through rational thought. Kant's opinion not withstanding, I mean to show that that the idea of universal maxim and utilitarian considerations are not mutually exclusive and I will present a brief reply to a common objection to universal prescriptivism.Īccording to Kant there are absolute truths of morality. Ethical dilemmas will emerge and Hare's system will show how these dilemmas might be resolved through combining elements of Kant and Mill's thought. I will subject each of these theories to hypothetical situations in order to illustrate them further. In this paper I will examine the ethical systems proposed by Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, and Richard Mervyn Hare. This question of whether an agent should consider the consequences of a deed or follow inviolable rules as a guide to right action is central to contemporary ethics. ![]() Anscombe holds that some actions, regardless of their consequences are always wrong. Elizabeth Anscombe famously wrote these words in her 1956 essay and pamphlet "Mr. "Come now, if you had to choose between boiling one baby and letting some frightful disaster befall a thousand people-or a million people, if a thousand is not enough-what would you do?" (Anscombe, 64). *First Place Winner of the Prestigious Bassen Prize* ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |