Ethical theories play a huge role in human life. All of them are based on the idea of the highest good which every person should strive to achieve. Thus, using this criterion, it is possible to divide ethical theories into utilitarian, deontological, and egoistical. According to utilitarianism, the moral value of behavior or an action is determined by its utility, ethical egoism supports the idea that every person should act according to his/her own interests, while deontological ethics discusses the ability of reason to show the human moral essence https://ninjas-essays.com/

Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that recognizes utility as the criterion of morality. According to utilitarianism, utility is regarded as the action that contributes to the achievement of happiness. Utilitarianism states that a person does not have any value; he/she is just considered to be a means of achieving utility. Only the principle of utility should be followed because it has an objective influence.

Jeremy Bentham’s Utilitarian Theory

Jeremy Bentham formulated the main principles of utilitarianism. According to Bentham, the purpose of all human actions is based on the principle of minimizing suffering and maximizing pleasure. Therefore, utility is determined by the human desire to reduce the number of unfavorable consequences and maximize the number of positive ones. Moreover, Jeremy Bentham’s theory is based on the principle of the greatest possible happiness for the greatest number of people. The above-mentioned two principles are interconnected as the greatest happiness can be achieved only through minimizing suffering and maximizing pleasure. Bentham offers these principles as tools which people can use to influence others and reach their goals.

John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarian Theory

Another representative of utilitarianism is John Stuart Mill. He argues that it is impossible to compare pleasure with suffering. Mill explains that pleasure and suffering have a qualitative nature, so they cannot be described in terms of quantity. For example, it is impossible to measure the state of mind with the help of arithmetic. Accordingly, Mill defines morality as the rules of human conduct, through the observance of which an existence free from suffering can be achieved. In addition, Mill states that people should promote not the personal but the common good. A person should not care only about his/her own happiness; he/she should contribute to the happiness of other people. Thus, according to Mill, the principle of utility actually implies a person’s desire to eliminate and reduce misfortune.

Immanuel Kant’s Deontological Ethics

The first deontological theory was Kant’s ethics. In contrast to utilitarianism, Immanuel Kant came to the conclusion that the basis of ethics is the consciousness of duty, which is a feature of the human mind. Kant also argues that the categorical imperative is the absolute rule of ethics. The obedience to this imperative determines the objective morality of the act. Thus, a person should act only according to such maxim that inspires him/her and can be a universal law at the same time. For example, if an individual wants to create a law “do not lie” which all people should obey, then he/she should not resort to lies as well. All in all, the theory of Kant argues that while choosing how to act, people should take into account not only their desires but also the universal principle – the categorical imperative.

The theory of utilitarianism is more convincing than Kant’s deontological ethics. Firstly, its positions are consistent with the criteria used for the intuitive assessment of the morality of behavior. For example, when people try to explain why they are morally obliged to perform a specific action, they are often guided by the consideration of benefits or harm that their actions may bring to others. Therefore, when a person calculates the utility of actions, he/she should also consider the interests of other people. Secondly, using the principles of utilitarianism, it is possible to explain why some types of conduct are deemed immoral, while others – morally justified. For example, a supporter of utilitarianism can prove that lying is bad because lies will lead to lower social welfare. So, it means that it is possible to morally justify all actions with the help of utilitarianism.

Ayn Rand’s Ethical Egoism

Ethical egoism is based on the idea of an individual ego. A person should care only about his/her greatest happiness but not about that of others. According to Ayn Rand, ethical egoism is the pursuit of one’s own personal interests which cause no harm to other members of society. If a person breaks certain rules to achieve personal goals, then he/she will be punished by society. Ayn Rand states that a human life is a standard of morality. Since life requires a certain course of action, any other courses will destroy it. Hence, an individual who does not perceive his/her life as the cause and goal of all actions acts on the motivation and attitudes of death. All in all, Rand’s ethical egoism is the morality of the choice influenced by reason.

Brian Medlin’s Ethical Egoism

In contrast to Ayn Rand, Brian Medlin has another view. He argues that Rand’s theory cannot be true because it is unable to serve as a guide to action. He thinks that moral principles should be divided into universal and categorical. Universal egoism states that an individual should care only about his/her own interests, disregarding the interests of other people except for situations when they contribute to his/her personal happiness. Categorical egoism claims that people should pursue their own interests as the universal rule. Moreover, Medlin argues that self-interest discussed by Rand cannot guarantee a rational basis for human action. Indeed, egoists cannot prove that their actions are good and do not cause harm to other people. They care only about themselves and never help others. So, the main argument against Rand’s ethical egoism is that it not only permits egoistic behavior but also demands it. It means that helping others at one’s own expense is considered morally wrong.

I totally agree with Medlin’s response. I also think that ethical egoism is self-defeating. For example, when a person persuades others to help him/her to achieve his/her personal aims, he/she disregards the interests of other individuals. In this case, those people who agree to help act against their own interests as they do not receive any benefit. In other words, they act contrary to the principle of egoism. So, it is necessary to divide ethical egoism into categorical and universal, otherwise, it engenders incoordination or incompatibility in human attitudes.

In conclusion, the proponents of utilitarianism such as John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham saw the source of morality in the person’s nature and his/her natural desire to get pleasure and avoid suffering. In contrast, ethical egoism states that all human actions are based on an egoistic motive (for example, the desire for respect). Kant’s deontological ethics differs from these two theories and claims that an action is worthy of praise only when it is performed not for the sake of one’s own interests but as a moral obligation. These three theories discuss the characteristics of humanistic trends in ethics, paying attention not to external authority but to individual consciousness and the realization of person’s capabilities.