Kant and Mill: The Function of Rationality Anonymous College

Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill represent two opposing schools of ethical thought. From Mill’s utilitarian perspective, the ethical value of anything can be determined based on its consequences, regardless of intent. For Kant, the consequences of an action do not matter, and intention is the only thing that does. Having each reasoned to these opposite conclusions, they have opposite ideas as to how rationality should be used. Mill suggests it as a means to achieve the greatest possible pleasures. Kant holds that a rational, self-determining will is an end unto itself, and argues that rationality cannot be intended to generate pleasure when in fact, it diminishes rather than increases enjoyment of life. As this essay will demonstrate, each position has strengths and weaknesses that make it difficult to fully accept or reject. Because Mill holds that the greatest good in life is to maximize pleasure, he believes that the function of reason is to attain pleasure. Kant, however, takes a conflicting view, believing that a rational will is the only moral force, and is its own end–therefore, its primary function is not to help people reach happiness.

According to Mill, human reason, like everything else, serves consequence; it is a...