Kantian Ethics, Utilitarianism, Eudaemonism, and Other Moral Philosophies
Kant’s Deontological Ethics
According to Kant, the factor that makes an action good or bad is not the action itself, but the will or intention with which it is performed. A will is good when it acts solely out of duty, believing it is the right thing to do, regardless of the consequences. Kant distinguishes between hypothetical imperatives (actions done to achieve a specific goal) and the categorical imperative (the moral law, which dictates that we should act only according to principles that we could will to become universal laws). An action has moral value only if it is done with good will, driven by reason and duty, not self-interest. Kantian morality is autonomous because individuals are subject only to their own reason and duty, not to the pursuit of happiness. Kant clearly separates the concepts of goodness and happiness.
Utilitarianism
Hedonism, which had little importance during the Middle Ages due to the dominance of Christianity, reappeared during the Renaissance. Utilitarianism is based on four theses:
- Consequentialism: The morality of an action is determined by its consequences.
- Hedonism: Pleasure is the ultimate good.
- Utility: Actions should maximize pleasure and minimize pain.
- General Principle: We should consider the pleasure and pain of everyone affected by our actions.
Bentham’s Hedonistic Utilitarianism
Jeremy Bentham is considered the most hedonistic utilitarian. He believed that nature has given us two masters: pleasure and pain. These guide us in determining what is good and bad. For Bentham, the *quantity* of pleasure was the sole determining factor.
J.S. Mill’s Refined Utilitarianism
John Stuart Mill argued that Bentham’s view would only be true if humans had the same capacities as animals. However, humans possess higher faculties. Cultivated individuals find satisfaction in higher pleasures. Mill acknowledged that a more cultivated person might experience greater suffering due to increased sensitivity. Utilitarian morality also includes altruism, the willingness to sacrifice one’s own pleasure for the good of others.
Eudaemonism (Aristotle)
Aristotle believed that the ultimate purpose of everything is *eudaimonia*, often translated as happiness or flourishing. Some theories equate happiness with pleasure, while others, like Aristotle’s eudaimonism, equate goodness with happiness. Aristotle believed that happiness is the ultimate end and the supreme good. He distinguished three types of ends:
- Those chosen for the sake of something else.
- Those chosen for themselves and for another purpose.
- Those chosen only for themselves.
True happiness is the ultimate end, pursued for its own sake. The virtuous person, and therefore the happy person, is one who acts excellently and is self-actualizing.
Cyrenaics
The initiator of this theory was Aristippus of Cyrene. Cyrenaics considered pleasure to be good and pain to be evil. They believed that nature provides a clear criterion to distinguish between good and bad actions: pleasurable feelings indicate good actions, while painful feelings indicate bad actions. These feelings arise from movements, both external and internal, which can be either pleasant or painful.
Epicureans
This school of thought is named after its founder, Epicurus of Samos. Epicureans believed that pleasure lies primarily in tranquility, that is, the absence of pain. They distinguished between static pleasure (tranquility) and kinetic pleasure (a movement or variation from a state of rest). Bodily pleasure was called *aponia* (absence of physical pain), and mental pleasure was called *ataraxia* (absence of mental disturbance). To achieve maximum happiness, Epicureans distinguished three types of desires:
- Natural and necessary.
- Natural but not necessary.
- Unnatural and unnecessary.
Ethics
From the Greek word meaning “character,” ethics is the study of morality and human action. It is the theory or science of moral behavior.