Kantian Ethics vs. Utilitarianism: Justice and Happiness
Kantian Formalism
Kantian formalism, as opposed to Aristotelian thought, posits that moral action is an end in itself, not a means to an end. It is a deontological rather than teleological approach, meaning an action is considered good based on its adherence to duty, not its consequences. Kant explores these concepts in his works, Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals and Critique of Practical Reason. Kant’s aim was to identify the essence of morality, that which makes an action moral.
The Good Will
For Kant, good will is the only intrinsically good thing. Any other human characteristic can be used for good or bad, but good will ensures that someone strives to act in the best possible way. This concept has been criticized because it focuses on intentions and ignores consequences. However, having good will, for Kant, means employing all means at one’s disposal to achieve a determined end.
Duty
According to Kant, acting from good will and acting from duty are equivalent. Duty is the necessity to act a certain way. To act morally out of duty is to act selflessly, solely because one believes it is their duty. Acting out of duty is not the same as acting according to duty. Acting out of duty means that duty is the sole motivation of the action, without considering the consequences. The aim is to fulfill the duty itself.
The Categorical Imperative
To act from duty is also to act out of respect for a law. Many moral rules of conduct can be cited, but Kant believed that all of them can be simplified into a single law, which he called the categorical imperative. A hypothetical imperative represents a practical need for an action as a means to achieve something else. These are pragmatic imperatives. A categorical imperative is a universal mandate and prescribes necessary actions that are good in themselves, regardless of consequences. To act from duty means to follow the categorical imperative.
Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism, whose main representatives were Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, was developed in Britain between the 18th and 19th centuries, coinciding with the Industrial Revolution. Utilitarian authors developed their theories by adapting to this new historical and social context. Utilitarians advocate a teleological ethic because they believe that actions have meaning only in relation to the purpose for which they are performed. Therefore, they are consequentialists: actions are good according to their effects and consequences, not their intentions. For utilitarians, one must seek the welfare of the greatest number of people. These thinkers are not limited to considering what is useful for an individual, but for everyone. The purpose to which every human being aspires is happiness, which, for utilitarians, is equivalent to pleasure or welfare.
Justice and Happiness
Happiness is the highest aspiration of human beings. Although living in a just society is not sufficient for happiness, it is a necessary condition to achieve it. Besides being related to individual behavior, happiness depends on the social and political context in which one lives. Hans Kelsen, in his short essay “What is Justice?”, argues that justice and happiness are interdependent. For Kelsen, justice is a possible, but not necessary, property of a social order.
Definitions of Justice
The concept of justice has different meanings. Justice can refer to a state power, and we also speak of justice when actions adhere to the current legality. The most widespread conception of justice is to restore balance, which is equity or equality. Differences can be addressed through restorative and distributive justice.
Justice as Fairness
- Restorative Justice means being fair by giving each person what they deserve based on their actions. It is to give what has been earned through work.
- Distributive Justice, in this case, being fair has to do with the distribution of common resources to balance inequities. Being fair is to reduce material and social injustices.
For John Rawls, promoting justice consists of ensuring equality of opportunity for all members of society, a society in which goods are distributed equitably.