The Rightness or Wrongness of Actions

Paper Summary:

This paper discusses a question raised in Mill's utilitarianism with reference to the works of that thinker and also Kant. After defining what is meant by the "rightness" or "wrongness" of an action, the paper discusses the phenomenon of assigning motives to agents in making a moral judgment. The difference between expected and actual consequences and its importance to the debate is emphasized. The paper ends with a discussion of the philosophy of Kant, which is found to be inadequate, as is the "motive-utilitarianism" of Singer.

From the Paper:

"The question of whether an agent's motive in performing an action affect any possible moral judgment of it is a deceptively complex one. At first glance it seems quite straightforward, mainly because people in general spend much time debating, and generally concentrating on, others' motives. A good example is the multitude of detective stories over the years which reveal as a shocking climax the motive for the murder: a bogus insurance claim or a crime of furtive passion. These things have conditioned people to keep in mind the motives of others as they go about their lives, although many philosophers have argued that the motives and actions should be considered independently, as part of different categories. There is a much more complex relationship between the two than may be expected. The question also links quite closely with some others, extremely important to moral philosophy, and utilitarianism in particular."

More papers on The Rightness or Wrongness of Actions:

• Analytical Essay # 23399 : "John Stuart Mill's Philosophy of Utilitarianism"
• Essay # 54207 : "Utilitarianism as a Form of Consequentialism"
• Term Paper # 147224 : "Truman and the Atomic Bomb"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: