Comparison of the Ethical Theories of Kant, Bentham and Mill

This paper intends to look into the theory of morality of Immanuel Kant, Jeremy Bentham, butt Stuart Mill and compare them from one another. In addition to that, it alike aims to mention the uncertainty which overhear arisen as I tackled these theories.Immanuel Kants Theory of Ethics FormalismAccording to Immanuel Kants Theory of Ethics, a deed is slump if the wreaks involved in the progression are also right (Thomson Gale, 2008, n.p.). Simply put, the end is only just if the means are as well (Thomson Gale, 2008, n.p.).Jeremy Benthams Theory of Ethics Ethical UniversalismAccording to Jeremy Bentham, his theory of ethics otherwise cognize as ethical or moral universalism is instituted upon utility which he categorically defines as that halalty in any object, whereby it ends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or gaiety or to prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil, or unhappiness to the party whose interest is considered (Bentham, 1948, p. 126). In turn, the aforesaid concept of universalism is established by looking into the sideline hypotheses/assertions/principles1)Jeremy Bentham asserts that the following terminologies a) pleasure b) happiness c) goodness d) benefit e) advantage 5) etcetera are of the same value so to speak (Germino, 1972, pp. 235 236)2)Jeremy Bentham reiterates that the following terminologies a) pleasure b) happiness c) goodness d) benefit e) advantage 5) etcetera are actually gauged, thus, calculable and irrefutable as well (Germino, 1972, pp. 235 236)3)Jeremy Bentham argues that an individuals act, as well as, the actions of the government ought to be founded or rooted upon the imperative which actually takes complete advantage of gratification and dwindles pain (Germino, 1972, pp. 235 236) and that4)Finally, it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong of human action in every situation, and in particular when governmental action is called for (Germino, 1972, pp. 235 236).John Stuart Mills Theory of Ethics UtilitarianismUtilitarianism, according to John Stuart Mill, is where morals/ethics/good deeds are based/founded/instituted upon (Ebenstein & Ebenstein, 1991, p. 580). The reason behind this claim is that, deeds are only correct or proper if and only if the at the end of it happiness is achieved/felt and wrong or improper if and only if at the closing stage of the deed wretchedness is re languishd (Ebenstein & Ebenstein, 1991, p. 580).That be said, happiness for John Stuart Mill is equivalent to the absence of unhappiness or any kind of negative emotion (Germino, 1972, p. 240). While, wretchedness for him, is when the occurrence of pain/ache/hurt is present at the finish of a certain deed (Germino 1972, p. 240).ComparisonImmanuel Kants theory of ethics is known as formalism, while that of Jeremy Benthams is known as ethical universalism, and that of John Stuart Mill is that of Utilitarianism which differ from each other a little sinc e Kant reiterates that an act is good only if the process utilized to finish off that is ethical as well while Bentham is based on the number of people going to benefit happiness from on the other hand, Mill states that an act is right if one ends up being happy (Germino, 1972, p. 240).Confusion/Uncertainty which have ArisenThere is a certain concept that is a little confusing, for instance, why is it that the number of nation achieving happiness is important to Bentham when it should be enough that an individual becomes happy due to an ethical act being carried out (Germino, 1972, p. 240)? It gets confusing because instead of focusing on the quality of happiness, the ethical theories were focused on the quantity (Germino, 1972, p. 240).ReferencesEbenstein, W. and Ebenstein, A. (1991). Great Political Thinkers Plato to the President.Forth Worth Harcourt BraceGermino, D. (1972). Machiavelli to Marx Modern Western Political Thought. ChicagoUniversity of Chicago Press