Kelsie Bettridge
According to Kant, reason imposes moral obligation in other words, morality is a matter of
duty (motive) rather than consequences. Explain what a maxim is and what makes a maxim
moral in Kantian terms. According to Mill, morality is based on consequences. In other
words, morality is determined by how much happiness is produced. State and explain the
utilitarian principle. Be specific
Apply Kant’s C.I. and Mill’s Utility principle to the following example.
You run an orphanage and have had a hard time making ends meet. A car dealership offers
you a new van worth $115,000 for free if you will falsify a report to the government that
states that the van was worth $30,000 Do you agree to take the van? Explain.
Discuss what problems you run into when trying to apply each theory.
The term maxim refers to one’s motivation, or intention for performing an action. Kant’s
cognitive imperative is the concept that one’s motive for action should not be affected by
circumstance; rather it should be able to be universalized for the whole of humanity as an
absolute moral statement. Kant believes that one should act intrinsically out of good will, that
their maxim should be good independent of any external relations. According to him, one
should act a certain way despite the possible consequences, that morality should be a priori.
In this example the maxim would be defined as dishonesty. Dishonesty is something
that cannot be universalized for all of humanity. Although the purpose of being dishonest is to
benefit the children, the outcome should not be considered because that would be acting
extrinsically and would also be affected by consequences rather than practical reason. Kant
would decline the opportunity to take the van because he would view the maxim immoral.
The problem with Kant’s theory in this situation is emotion is not involved whatsoever.
It is irrational to not take the consequences into consideration in deciding what is moral and the
right decision. The act of dishonesty would result in helping the lives of children which should
hold a greater value.
In contrast, Mill’s morality theory is based on the utilitarian principle. His theory focuses
on aposteriori, meaning the resulting consequences. The utilitarian principle is the belief that
one has an obligation to promote the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of
people. Mill was a political philosopher and believed that in order to have a good society the
majority of the people must be moral. He evaluated the value of hedonism which is the theory
that it is human nature to seek happiness over pain and decided that happiness is what
motivates one to be moral. He believes that happiness can be classified as above or below the
waist pleasures and also determined for quantity or quality. Mill also believes that the
consequences of an action are of more importance morally than one’s intentions for the action,
and that only the short term consequences should be considered, the facts. In summary the
three concepts of importance to morality according to mill are; defining groups, happiness, and
the consequences.
In this example, the majority can be evaluated as the orphans, the car dealership, and
yourself as the owner of the orphanage and the minority is the government. The happiness
produced is advantageous to the majority; the orphanage, the dealership, and the children
would all benefit from this situation. The happiness produced is of quality, above the waist
pleasures because the van received from the car dealership is saving the orphanage money,
which makes it easier to make ends meet, which decreases the likelihood of the orphanage
going out of business and the orphans having no shelter. These consequences are short term
because they are based on fact not speculation. According to Mill the correct decision would
be to accept the van because the consequences of that action would produce the greatest
amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people.
The problems with Mill’s moral theory are that defining groups can be subject to
evaluation. Also, happiness is often difficult to define and can be questioned whether it should
be considered important in terms of morality or not.
Kelsie Bettridge
Final
Phil
Identify Kohlberg’s stages of moral development. Explain how someone in each stage of
development would respond to the following moral dilemma:
There was a woman with cancer. There was no known treatment that would save her. She
was in terrible pain and very weak. She had less than a year to live. A good dose of pain
killer would end her suffering. She was delirious with pain but in her calm periods would
plead with the doctor to end her life. Although the doctor knows that mercy killing is against
the law he considers her request. Should the doctor give her the drug that would end her life?
Kohlberg’s moral development theory holds that motives for ethical behavior has three
identifiable developmental levels, each more adequate at responding to moral dilemmas than
its predecessor. Kohlberg determined that the process of moral development was primarily
concerned with justice, and that it continued throughout the individual's lifetime.
The first stage of Kohlberg’s moral development is the preconventional stage which is
especially common in children ranging from ages 2-6. In this stage the motive for acting moral
is first to avoid punishment and the second priority is to receive a reward. When confronted
with this moral dilemma, someone in this stage would respond that the doctor should not give
the woman the drug because it is against the law and he would have to go to jail. They might
also argue that the doctor would receive no benefit in going through with the mercy killing so it
is therefore not worth it.
The second level is conventional (typical of adolescents and adults) in which one
assimilates society’s values into their own and seeks approval of social peers. In this stage one
has conformed to the social norms and acts accordingly even if there is no punishment or
reward. People in this stage believe in abiding by the law and responding to the obligations of
duty. In this situation someone in this stage would answer that the doctor should not act in
such a way because killing is wrong and not socially accepted therefore he would ruin his
reputation and his clientele. They might also respond not to end her life because it is against
the law and against the morals, obligations, and duties of the doctor. They would argue it is the
doctor’s duty to preserve life.
The post-conventional level, the final stage of moral development, is marked by a
growing realization that individuals are separate entities from society, and that the individual’s
own perspective may take precedence over society’s view; individuals may disobey rules
inconsistent with their own principles. Post-conventional moralists live by their own ethical
principles; principles that typically include such basic human rights as life, liberty, and justice.
Someone in this stage would put the rights of the woman and her desires first before
themselves and act in a way that they believe is right despite the consequences. Someone in
this situation would want to end the pain and suffering of the woman and sacrifice their own
self for it, accepting full punishment.
Given the grading criteria of the class, what grade do you think you deserve and why:
I believe I have put forth my full effort in this class. I have completed every assignment and
done my best work with each. I have only missed a few classes and when I have I’ve taken responsibility
for the work I’ve missed by obtaining notes from other classmates. When homework was assigned in
this class I took it seriously and did the research so that I was prepared for each lecture. I’ve given my
full attention in class and really strived to learn the subject. I believe my work and understanding of
ethics and morality has progressed greatly since the beginning of this course. Because of all of these
reasons I believe I deserve an A grade.