Utilitarianism and Categorical Imperative

Utilitarianism and Categorical Imperative

Everyone leads their life differently. There are several ethical theories guiding how people lead their lives. Ethical theories provide different perspectives on ethical dilemmas. One group of these ethical theories is consequentialism, an ethical theory that judges an action based on the consequences of the action, such as utilitarianism (Rosenstand, 2017). Another group of ethical theories is deontological ethics, which focuses on an action’s intention, obligation, rights, and duty and not its consequences; one approach to deontology is Categorical Imperative (MacKinnon & Fiala, 2016). Accordingly, from both utilitarianism and Categorical Imperative, there are aspects that can be considered right and wrong.

Utilitarianism

According to MacKinnon and Fiala (2016), “the basic moral principle of utilitarianism is called the principle of utility or the greatest happiness principle” (p. 97). Consistently to understand the concept of utilitarianism, one must understand the principle of greatest happiness or utility. From the principle of greatest happiness, a person’s action is considered morally right if it is based on its ability to yield maximum happiness for most people while minimizing unhappiness. Subsequently, an action is morally right if its consequence causes ultimate happiness for the highest number of people.

Accordingly, I think there is an approach to utilitarianism that is right. Placing a greater number of people, be it a society before oneself is moral. For instance, social benefits are considered before considering oneself, such as constructing a hospital in an area in need of one; the society in that area will be happy to have health services brought closer to them. Consistently, utilitarianism is a great concept in terms of service for the greater good. Therefore, this approach to utilitarianism indicates what I think is right about it.

However, I think there is an approach to utilitarianism that is wrong. Basing an action as morally right based on the greatest number of people (majority) “places no constraints whatsoever on the maximization of aggregate well-being” (Kahane et al., 2018, p. 132). For example, while constructing a road that would link numerous states, thereby serving a great number of people, an individual’s life may be threatened, or their house may be demolished in the process, inconveniencing that person for the greater good.

Categorical Imperative

According to MacKinnon and Fiala (2016), Categorical Imperatives “tell us what we ought to do no matter what, under all conditions, or categorically” (p. 119). Consistently, a person’s actions should depend on what they ought to do in a circumstance, indicating duty and obligation, thus intention. Accordingly, the intention of an action determines whether it is morally right, and some Categorical Imperative formulations include Universalizability of action and maxim. Maxim implies that a universal law applies to all to guide their actions, and Universalizability of action implies that people are obligated to treat humanity properly.

Consistently, I think an approach to Categorical Imperatives is right. Acting from obligation results in moral actions; such a person ought to help others, which is right. From the maxim formulation, if a person is in a position to help others in need, they can apply the maxim rule to establish if the action is right. I also think there is a wrong approach to categorical imperatives. According to McCarty (2015), “a negative test result indicates that the action tested is morally wrong” (p. 177). For example, people ought to wake up early and start their day, but a person on a night shift may sleep in during the day and wake up in the evening, which does not constitute a morally wrong action.

In conclusion, both ethical theories and their concepts are important and applicable in everyday life. In my personal life, both utilitarianism and Categorical Imperative fit into my life. For instance, when a majority of my family members want to have pizza for dinner, we order pizza, and almost everyone is happy, showcasing utilitarianism. Additionally, when I am tired from work, I tend to sleep in because I am obligated to give rest to my physical body to prevent burnout, showcasing the Categorical Imperative. Accordingly, even unknowingly, ethical theories are applied in people’s daily lives.

References

Kahane, G., Jac, E., Earp, B. D., Caviola, L., Faber, N. S., Crockett, M. J., & Savulescu, J. (2018). Beyond Sacrificial Harm: A Two-Dimensional Model of Utilitarian Psychology (vol 125, pg 131, 2018). Psychological Review, 125, 164. https://www.neuroscience.ox.ac.uk/publications/872005

MacKinnon, B., & Fiala, A. (2016). Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues. Cengage Learning.

McCarty, R. (2015). False negatives of the categorical imperative. Mind, 124(493), 177–200. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzu151

Rosenstand, N. (2017). The Moral of the Story: An Introduction to Ethics. McGraw-Hill Education.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

---

Step 1: Write a 500+ word paper on the following topic:

Evaluate Utilitarianism in terms of what you think is right (if anything) about it and what you think is wrong (if anything) about it.
Evaluate the theory of Categorical Imperative in terms of what you think is right (if anything) about it and what you think is wrong (if anything) about it.

Conclude by describing how either, both, or neither fits into your personal life.
Please use direct citations in APA format from our textbook (MacKinnon & Fiala) and outside sources to support your answers.
Be specific and give examples, using at least two outside references, to buttress your argument. Cite all sources in APA format.