Assignment Question

Write a persuasive essay to Aristotle in which you are trying to convince him that Kantian ethics or natural law ethics is a more successful theory than utilitarianism. Make sure to explain how natural law ethicists reason.

Answer

Introduction

Kantian Ethics

Kantian ethics, developed by Immanuel Kant, emphasizes the importance of rationality and the moral worth of actions. Kant argued that moral principles should be universalizable, and individuals should act out of a sense of duty rather than inclination. According to Kant, one should act only according to those maxims that can be consistently willed as a universal law. This principle is known as the Categorical Imperative. Kantian ethics is deontological, focusing on the inherent rightness or wrongness of actions rather than their consequences (Johnson, 2018). Kantian ethics aligns with your virtue ethics, Aristotle, as both systems stress the importance of character and the pursuit of moral excellence. Virtue ethics encourages individuals to cultivate virtuous traits, while Kantian ethics emphasizes moral duty and the importance of universal moral principles. This compatibility makes Kantian ethics a strong contender as a successful ethical theory.

Natural Law Ethics

Natural law ethics, influenced by the works of Aristotle and later developed by thinkers like Thomas Aquinas, posits that ethics is rooted in human nature. According to this theory, humans possess inherent moral principles that can be deduced from their natural inclinations and purpose. Natural law ethics suggests that moral principles are objective and can be discovered through reason (Carr, 2017). Aristotle, natural law ethics resonates with your idea of eudaimonia, the highest human good attained through the development of human nature. Natural law ethics complements virtue ethics by acknowledging that humans have an intrinsic moral compass, making it a compelling alternative to utilitarianism.

Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism, championed by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, posits that the moral value of an action is determined by its consequences. It advocates maximizing overall happiness and minimizing suffering. Utilitarianism is consequentialist, focusing on outcomes rather than the inherent nature of actions (Smart & Williams, 2018). While utilitarianism seeks to promote well-being, it often disregards individual rights and the intrinsic value of certain actions. This consequentialist approach can lead to morally problematic conclusions, such as justifying the sacrifice of one innocent person to save many. This fundamental flaw makes utilitarianism less compatible with virtue ethics and, by extension, less successful as an ethical theory.

Natural Law and Kantian Ethics in Comparison to Utilitarianism

Aristotle, both Kantian and natural law ethics respect the moral worth of each individual and the importance of fulfilling moral duties. In Kantian ethics, actions are evaluated based on their conformity to the Categorical Imperative, ensuring that individuals are treated with respect and dignity. Similarly, natural law ethics recognizes the inherent moral principles derived from human nature, promoting actions that harmonize with these principles. Contrastingly, utilitarianism tends to justify actions that might be seen as morally reprehensible in virtue ethics. The doctrine of utility may allow for sacrificing the rights and well-being of some for the greater good. This consequentialist perspective often disregards individual rights and the intrinsic value of certain actions, which is in stark contrast to Kantian and natural law ethics.

The Role of Reason in Kantian Ethics and Natural Law Ethics

Kantian ethics and natural law ethics place a strong emphasis on the role of reason in moral decision-making. Kant argues that rationality should guide our moral actions, as individuals are capable of understanding and adhering to universal moral laws. In natural law ethics, reason is also instrumental in discerning objective moral principles based on human nature. Utilitarianism, on the other hand, relies on calculating the balance of pleasure and pain, which may not always align with rational moral principles. The pragmatic approach of utilitarianism can lead to morally inconsistent decisions, compromising its success as a comprehensive ethical theory.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Aristotle, Kantian ethics and natural law ethics offer more compelling ethical frameworks than utilitarianism. Kantian ethics focuses on moral duty, emphasizing the inherent worth of individuals and universalizable maxims. Natural law ethics, influenced by your virtue ethics, acknowledges the objective moral principles inherent in human nature. Both theories highlight the significance of reason in ethical decision-making, aligning them with virtue ethics.  Utilitarianism, while promoting happiness and well-being, often disregards individual rights and the intrinsic value of actions. Its consequentialist approach can lead to morally problematic outcomes. Therefore, Kantian ethics and natural law ethics provide more comprehensive, compatible, and morally sound alternatives to utilitarianism.  As you have illuminated the path to virtue and moral excellence through your virtue ethics, Aristotle, it is only fitting that we consider ethical theories that align with your wisdom and vision for a just and virtuous society.

References

Carr, D. (2017). Natural Law and Moral Philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Johnson, O. (2018). Kant’s Moral Philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Smart, J. J. C., & Williams, B. (2018). Utilitarianism: For and Against. Cambridge University Press.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

1. What is Kantian ethics?

• Kantian ethics is an ethical framework developed by Immanuel Kant, emphasizing moral duty and the universalizability of maxims. It evaluates actions based on their inherent rightness or wrongness.

2. What is natural law ethics?

• Natural law ethics, influenced by Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas, asserts that moral principles are rooted in human nature and can be deduced through reason. It emphasizes the compatibility between human nature and moral principles.

3. What is utilitarianism?

• Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that focuses on maximizing overall happiness and minimizing suffering. It judges actions based on their consequences, aiming to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number.

4. How do Kantian and natural law ethics compare to utilitarianism?

• Both Kantian and natural law ethics prioritize the moral worth of individual actions and reason-based decision-making. They align with virtue ethics and emphasize the importance of individual rights and moral duty. In contrast, utilitarianism prioritizes consequences and may sometimes justify actions that disregard individual rights.

5. Are Kantian and natural law ethics more successful than utilitarianism?

• Kantian and natural law ethics offer more compelling ethical frameworks, as they respect the moral worth of individuals, adhere to universal moral principles, and place a strong emphasis on reason. Utilitarianism, while promoting happiness, often sacrifices individual rights and may lead to morally problematic outcomes.