Utilitarian vs. Moral Subjective

To compare and contrast the differences between utilitarian and moral subjective

It is crucial to first clearly define both terms. Utilitarianism is described as a normative ethical theory that determines the right and wrong of an action or decision based on the outcomes of that particular action. Since the word utility is a derivation of utilitarianism, it refers to enjoyment or contentment. This theory takes into account not just personal interests but also the interests of the society as a whole, hence its main criterion also depends on how happy the community is.

On the other hand, moral subjective is defined when morality is gauged according to the desires of human beings. It is deeply embedded in human desires, thus increase the preference of those things. Moreover, it is not based on any solid facts and evidence, so deriving it entirely by human judgment. Morality is known to evolve according to the changing surroundings. A very well-known example is that of homosexuality. In the earlier times, people used to shun the homosexuals and consider their gender orientation to be immoral, but as time has progressed the moral compass of people has also evolved and led to a decrease in the level of hatred for the homosexuals (Harsanyi 323). There are people who still consider it to be a sin, but the majority has become accustomed to their existence.

When trying to relate Immanuel Kant’s ideology about morals with the utilitarian and moral subjective

It was observed that Kant’s moral theory was deontological in nature, which means that an individual’s interest to do the wrong thing is overcome by the relation of conducting the morally right action. They believe it to be their soul duty to do the right decision. Followed by this, he also stated that the principle of morality should revolve around such ideas that the morals devised through these principles should apply to all current as well as future situations and scenarios. According to Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative, he made it binding on all citizens to follow the moral code without any exceptions (Brink 418). Keeping this core principle in mind, he advised people to make such decisions that all those around you also make similar decisions, thus, following the concept of Universalizability. Furthermore, since one is obligated to act in an exemplary way, it is advised to show compassion towards humanity and make sure that your results will prove to be beneficial for not just your sake, but for all humanity’s. Also, Immanuel Kant also asks people to place themselves not only in the place of the legislator but also the legislated, thus, ensuring that fairness and impartiality are maintained at all times.

In conclusion

It is evident that Immanuel Kant’s thoughts are more in sync with the principles of Utilitarianism. Both of them suggest that a person’s actions will be morally right; if they make sure that their intentions are morally right as well. Moreover, both focus on the effect of the individual’s decision on the whole community. They state that the person needs to always keep in mind the entire humanity before making a wrong decision. If the results reaped by an action our right and beneficial for the entire community, or even the universe, it shows that decisions made before taking those actions were morally right. This way not only individual utility will increase, but also the whole communities.

Works Cited

Brink, David O. “Utilitarian morality and the personal point of view.” The Journal of

Philosophy 83.8 (1986): 417-438.

Harsanyi, John C. “A theory of prudential values and a rule utilitarian theory of morality.” Social

Choice and Welfare 12.4 (1995): 319-333.