Ravi P, Theories of Kant and Bentham

 

Differentiate theories of Kant and Bentham in one sentence?

Kant's theory is on the other extreme of consequentiality theories. Kant's moral theory does not look at all into consequences. Kant's theory is deontological - it looks only into what SHOULD be done regardless of the consequences. Do the right thing even if this causes unhappiness. This might not strike you as sensible: Why should we not care if our actions, to be morally appropriate, should have the right kinds of effects on other people Kant, think of morality in the same way. Consider this example: If someone tries to do something nice for you but messes up and causes trouble, you cannot, in good faith, blame him. Assuming that he meant well, his good intention must surely count, morally speaking. If the outcome could not have been predicted, for instance, then, the fact that the outcome was not to your benefit should not affect your judgment of his action: He did mean well, after all. Isn't a good intention all that counts when it comes to praising and blaming moral agents?

 

Bentham held that laws should be socially useful and not merely reflect the status quo: that men inevitably pursue pleasure and avoid pain; that desires may be broadly classified into self- and other-regarding and that the function of law is to award punishment and rewards to maintain a just balance between them. That all actions are right and good when they promote "the happiness of the greatest number" is the principal of utility, a phrase coined by Hutcheson or Priestley, but popularized by Bentham. As an ethical theory, utilitarianism was crude and full of inconsistencies, basing itself on purely quantitative considerations. But as a principal of legal reform Bentham's "calculus" met with greater success.