In our everyday life, I believe some concepts contain an air of uncertainty when related to their true meaning. Any attempt to explain these concepts would result in the creation of synonymic and metaphorical expressions ( Durac, 2019) . Thus, there are no constructive definitions that can be obtained from such discussions. This phenomenon was common whenever I delved into the in-depth discussion of ethics, probability and time. In this paper, I will focus on expounding on the purpose behind ethical reasoning and exploring on the instance where morality (being good or bad) comes about when observing the society at large. Despite its common usage, the true meaning behind such words often remains ambiguous. It is only through clarification that the true nature of such concept and their relevance to the society can be understood.
Morality, as a component of the philosophy, is not perceived the same manner by every person. There are many other factors such as religion, poverty and the mental state bears many diverse ideologies on the way people ought to lead their lives. While many people believe that the mental condition of people should be considered when passing judgement, others believe an all offences are quite similar. Therefore, there should be no sympathy for the offender. Such perspectives are classified into two categories. The first category is Utilitarian, which believes that an offender should be judged according to the mental state. At the same time, Kantian philosophy holds that an offence is an offence regardless of the intention.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Both ethical approaches and perspectives explain ethics. Kantian philosophy evaluates ethics based on initial aspirations and resultant deed while Utilitarian approach ethics based on actual acts. Kant reasoning focuses on the reason behind deeds rather than focusing on the repercussions of deeds to measures ethics. However, Utilitarian approaches evaluate the impacts of any act on people and hold to the idea that if actions, regardless of the inspiration harm other people, then they are considered unethical.
It is upon these critical aspects of disparities between Utilitarian and Kant that the premises of ethics rest ( Mensah, 2020) . According to Kant, as long as a person can make decisions and guide their actions through reasoning, and because ethical laws are laws of reason and that human beings are the incarnation of moral laws, then the person is inherently considered an agent of ethics. On the other hand, the Utilitarian view is concerned with the action and how it affects people. While both perspectives of ethics failed to explain the exact boundaries of ethics, the Kantianism has since been seen as the most appropriate. It is because of its flexible design, and its obvious principle of true and false, which prevents people from rationalizing on the standards of ethics as a way of learning.
From the Utilitarian perspective, the concepts that describe the boundaries of true and false are determined through the impact of individual actions ( Mensah, 2020) . If the effect of the story is anticipated, then it is considered ethical. Utilitarian perspective holds to the philosophy that all deeds occur intending to attain happiness and exception from pain. However, it can be concluded that the concept of Utilitarian focuses on actions of achieving pleasure and not on real satisfaction from individual deeds.
From my perspective, I believe that the two theories represent the diverse analytic concepts for morality. Kant theory with the examines the required elements in sorting out moral principles from the rest, which result in the distinct and well-informed concept of pure ethics. However, Kantianism concepts do not feature in the Utilitarian perspective, which views the action as a combination of both ethical and practical issues.
References
Durac, L. (2019). Ethics and morality-an overview of the main conceptual approaches. Economy Transdisciplinarity Cognition , 22(1).
Mensah, R. O. (2020). A comparative philosophical analysis of the Kantian principle of moral theory and the Utilitarian theory: Applications and critiques. Mensah, Ronald Osei, A comparative philosophical analysis of the Kantian principle of moral theory and the Utilitarian theory: Applications and critiques (September 17, 2020) .
