A comparison of the philosophies of Kant and Mills with respect to moral action.
This paper looks at the different approaches taken by Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill in their writings on moral actions. The paper explains that Kant’s philosophy is based on logic, while Mill’s moral philosophy determines that the ideal situation would yield actions in the best interest of the general consensus.
“The logic by which Kantianism is based involves science, religion, and metaphysics, which Kant considers necessary truths. As Kant states, “If a law is to have moral force” it must carry with it absolute necessity, with one’s duty to these necessary truths the compelling action to follow a moral code. Since immorality would be a contradiction to universal laws of morality, the double standard of allowing right actions by some and wrong actions by others is eliminated. Also, Kant’s moral philosophy does not allow elements of human desire to affect the moral code because it is not a necessity as desire is an element of freedom that can not be proven to exist. While Kantianism focuses on determining moral acts through duty independent of desire, Mill’s moral philosophy accounts for the will of desire deeply embedded in human actions.”