Hume and Kant

Andrew Katz

word count: 1680

Similarities in Morality

In the excerpt taken from Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill argues for a morality that increases the general happiness for the largest amount of people. His argument can be compared to many of the arguments of the other philosophers we have studied thus far. This paper will focus on the commonalities between Mill and two of these philosophers, David Hume and Immanuel Kant. Mill and Hume are both empiricists so the fundamentals of their arguments are the same. Mill and Kant are both absolutists so they both try to provide a guideline for morality that is universal. Mill uses the resemblances of his argument to those of Hume and Kant to increase the validity of his own stance. By agreeing with Hume and refuting Kant it strengthens his own position.

Mill and Hume are both empiricists so they believe that sensations give you knowledge. They both ground their arguments on the principle that morality should be based on sensations and experience. In the excerpt taken from A Treatise of Human Nature and An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, Hume argues that reason and rationality have a limited role in morality, while the primary basis of our morals is our sentiment. He says that ultimately it is how we feel that drives us to action. He argues, “It appears evident, that the ultimate ends of human actions can never, in any case, be accounted for by reason, but recommend themselves entirely to the sentiments and affections of mankind, without any dependence on the intellectual faculties.” (Hume 113) Mill says something similar when he writes, “But there is this basis of powerful natural sentiment; and this it is which, when once the general happiness is recognized as the ethical standard, will constitute the strength of the utilitarian morality.” (Mill 21)

The above two quotes show the commonalities between their two arguments. They both say that sentiment must be the foundation...