I know that I am posting this weeks post a little early, but I wanted to go ahead and get it out there before the stress of midterms and the closeness of fall break hits me.
My post this week is focused on something Dr. J said in class sometime last week. Dr. J stated that she is a Kantian, yet she often acts in such a way that her actions would be considered a form of utilitarianism. Why would one claim to be a Kantian and act in ways that fit to Utilitarianism ethics? This has stumped me all week. I think that most people who claim to be Kantians do in fact act in such a way that their actions would be considered Utilitarian, so why are these folks who claim to be Kantians in such denial of their utilitarian acts? Why do Kantians claim to be Kantians if in fact their actions do not line up with the deontological standpoint?
I used to think that I could be a Kantian. Kant’s ideas are solid and he seems to be able to rationalize every situation to fit his ethical principles. Kant has three different versions of the categorical imperative so in any situation one can simply refer back to those three principles and judge if an action is moral or not. Acting for duty is the sole purpose of the Kantian and not using emotion or acting on consequences is the goal of the duty-focused action. The Kantian seems great in theory, but do Kantians exist in this day in age? I have difficulty believing that they actually exist in true Kantian form.
I cannot be a Kantian because my actions and my view on the actions I do are similar to the way that Mill views actions. I hate to say it, but I tend to want to make the largest amount of people the happiest. Is that bad? Often, when discussing Mill and Utilitarianism people grimace and deconstruct the view Mill holds on ethical principles. I do not understand why Mill gets such a bad reputation around the philosophy world. We are emotional beings, or at least most of us are, why is acting out of emotion such a bad thing? Yes, that means we get lumped in with Utilitarian ethics, but I do not see the “wrongness” in such actions. Perhaps I have been hanging out with too many philosophy majors, because they seem to be devoted to Kant and also seem to be nothing but disapproving about Mill.
So, back to my original questions, why do people claim to be Kantians and then act in Utilitarian ways? Why would they not want to claim being a Utilitarian? What is so great about being a Kantian that I can’t seem to grasp?
Liz, I am glad that you brought up this question for I sometimes struggle with the same or similar topics.
ReplyDeleteFor me it was very helpful, what Dr. J said about Mill's statement about Kant: According to Mill, Kant is only a hidden Rule Utilitarian, because he tends to set up rules, based on so-called "a priori"-knowledge, but are in effect also lead from consequences.
I think, if we try to look from this perspective at Kant's theories, a lot of things seem to be way easier to understand.
Liz, this is a great question that probably stood out to a lot of people, including me. I unfortunately cannot answer your questions but to me it seems like there is a negative light put on Utilitarianism when stating that the reality of consequences outweighs the theoretical. Perhaps people see Kant’s theory as more fair in the sense that he says that something can still be good even when its consequences aren’t. It seems to me that maybe people can relate to a situation when they did something they viewed as good and it didn’t lead to the desired effect but they don’t want to define the action as bad based on the consequences because they had good intentions. However, at the same time, many people would agree with your feeling of wanting to make the largest amount of people happy.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad I'm not the only person who has struggled with this! Flo- I think your comment explains a lot. I have not been looking at it from that perspective and that really helps. Esha- You seem to struggle with the same questions I do! I wish I could offer a solid answer to all the questions we both have, but unfortunately I cannot. I do think Flo has a good explanation though.
ReplyDelete