Kantian Ethics, Utilitarianism, And Virtue Ethics

A person’s actions impacts their peers, communities, and the world. Many people aspire to be “good” people, and hope to put good out into the world. One can define “good” in many different ways, but depending on an individual's ethical code, they may or may not be considered good. The three major ethical theories which we addressed are Kantian Ethics, Utilitarianism, and Virtue Ethics. A strong argument could be made for each theory, but one sticks out as the best and most reasonable theory of ethics. Kantian Ethics is the best universal theory of ethics, as it allows for individual rights and is specific enough to follow. Kantian ethics stresses individual rights, reason, and motivation for actions. Immanuel Kant believed that each person
Moral absolutism means Kantian ethics has a specific set of rules which should be followed no matter what the consequences may be. It is an issue, as no set of rules should be blindly followed without reason, but in a way highlights a benefit of Kantian ethics. This issue applies most to Kantianism compared to the other two theories because it is the most specific. Given that a person uses their reasoning ability, Kantian ethics can never truly be “blindly followed,” since reason would prevent anyone from making “blind” decisions. For example, consider if someone hiding Jews during the Holocaust was asked by the Gestapo “Are you hiding Jews?” In one way, it is the person’s moral duty to tell the truth. On the other hand, it is their moral duty to preserve their own life and the lives of the people they are hiding. This shows Kantian ethics is not always a clear choice like “do not lie ever,” but sometimes we must use reason to consider which option is the highest
Emotion seems like it should be considered in decision making, since there can be such strong sensations associated with certain decisions. Making a decision against your own emotions seems like it would be difficult to do. On the other hand, this may be why it is best to do so. Acting on emotions is more likely to be selfish and it is more likely you will oppress some party and help another. For example, most people are emotional towards their loved-ones. They want their own family and friends to succeed. If decisions were made from an emotional standpoint, it may seem to make sense to use other people who you care for less in order to benefit your own family. Kantian ethics prevents this type of action from happening. Also, it seems difficult to say we should not act emotionally towards those we love. In a loving relationship, one would expect two people to have an emotional connection and to treat one-another differently than they may treat others. This seems to be left out of the equation with Kantian ethics. To rebut that argument, it seems that ethics and an emotional relationship do not need to be completely interconnected. An emotional relationship includes things other than ethics, and ethics includes things outside of emotional relationships. Therefore, Kantian ethics can still exist in