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

Kant and Mill Ideologies - Essay ExampleIndeed, Mill claims that people should value the principle of utility as a tool that derives alternative moral principles, which promote oecumenical happiness. The fundamental principle of morality means that happiness is intended pleasure and absence of pain where correctly 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 peoples actions based on the secondary principles, which promote general happiness. On the other hand, Immanuel Kant defines the fundamental principle of morality as the Categorical Imperative which basis moral requirements on a pattern of rationality. He refers to the fundamental principle of morality as the law of an autonomous will where moral reasons are supreme to any other reason. Ideally, one cookery of Kants Categorical Imperative encourages individuals to act on a motivational thought that one can cons istently 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 justice as acts of good will.... Indeed, Will objects to the idea that pleasure is the still 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 quantity and qualities of pleasure where authentic pleasures are more desirable and valuable than others in relation to moral deliberations (Booher 1). Notably, Mills objection to the argument against utilitarianism should think the distinct value that pleasures attract with higher pleasures having more value than lower pleasures. It should also distinguish bet ween the quantity and quality of pleasure as head as favor some activities as being better 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 basic principle of ethics, and the foundation of morality. According to Mill, gentle beings are different from non-human animals in a morally interesting way. Ideally, Mil noned that animals are irrational and are not self-aware or did not have 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 Start Mill 1). He supports this by ass erting that individuals who enjoy all pleasures qualify as the only judges who equally crave for mental pleasures.