Moral philosophy is part of the field of ethics where philosophers discuss and argue their opinions and views on regards of defending and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior. Morality could be interpreted in many different ways because at the same time is a set of standards or principles derived from a personal code of conduct based on religion, philosophy or it can derive from a standard that a person believes should be universal. Since we live in a society where we all have to live in harmony and respect with each other, it is important that each one of us should be aware about what are our personal standards and views on this topic. It is important that the person should acknowledge his/her perspective about morality since it would impose reasonable obligation to refrain from rape, stealing, murderer, assault and other aspects that will target a person in the society. During the past decades philosophers and other important people have studied the human behavior and presented us with their views and their own perspectives on this topic, at the same time they have disagree criticized with one another about the consequences of their views. Kant and Mill were two great philosophers who had influenced many with their visions of moral philosophy and they had left us their theories that have guide us in to make our own personal perspective in this matter.
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), a British philosopher that strongly contributed to the development and the understanding of moral philosophy. He explained the moral philosophy through the Utilitarism theory, this theory explain that the moral rightness of an action are depending of the outcomes or consequences of these actions. As part of the basic rule of “Utilitarism”, happiness is an important factor of our actions which they would influence our moral views, “the utilitarian give the principle of utility a moral character by insisting that what is ethically relevant is not only happiness or yours, but happiness itself” (Melchert, Pg. 511). Mills argues that the amount of suffering and happiness is what signify the morality of an action; by happiness Mills means pleasure and joy as opposed to pain and suffering. According to Mills, if the action made by the person produces happiness so it would be the right morally action, on contrast if the action did not promote happiness so they would not be the right action. The key concept of the utilitarian moral philosophy it it’s the consequentialism “actions are sorted in to the morally acceptable and the morally unacceptable by virtue of the consequences” (Melchert, Pg. 514), but when selecting the right course of action we should consider the following: “try to foresee the consequences of each action open to us, compare the total happiness produce by each and choose the one that produces the most happiness overall” (Melchert, Pg. 514). Mills theory is interesting and provocative, however I do see his point about happiness and satisfaction in our actions and decisions, as well as a person and we should held accountable for our actions and their consequences. However, not everyone would share the same happiness and their results would not always bring a positive outcome. In addition, Mills don’t explain about the quantity or quality happiness, how we know that our actions are morally correct, how we would determine that, also his theory does not give me a clear view of the truly intentions behind the action. For that unclear explanation I personal would disagree with his views on morality.
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), a great German philosopher who was opponent to the theory of Utilitarism. Kant’s views in morality are influence by the deontology theory which states we are morally obligated to act in accordance with a certain set of principles and rules regardless of the outcome (duty based), “we act from a good will when we act out of the sense of duty doing what is right solely because it is right from respect for the
