Term Paper Hotline

1-888-774-9994

Exclusive Order Taking Hotline

1-866-935-SALE

The Paper Experts

Brings To You:

SUPERIOR-TERMPAPERS.COM

Information On Our Paper Policy

Looking to Earn Extra Money?
Click Here to Find Out More. 

We are 100% Legitimate and a Professional North American Writing Service!

Utilitarian versus Kantian Notions of Punishment. Utilitarians were not so idealistic that they neglected to address the issue of punishment. The notion of a retributive justice, or an eye for an eye, went against Utilitarian principles as it promoted unhappiness rather than happiness. They did, however, accede to the existence of a prison system on two conditions. The first was that by locking the criminal away, future unhappiness might be prevented in that the criminal was incapacitated and could, therefore, commit no more crimes. The second condition was that prisons become facilities for rehabilitation and not punishment, thereby promoting the happiness of the criminal as well as society in general. Kant (1724-1804) defined a philosophical principle known as the Categorical Imperative. Unlike the Utilitarians who believed there was no right or wrong way to do things, only a better way, (i.e--the way which would lead to the greatest happiness for society), Kant believed in a set of rules from which man could not deviate. Moral rules, then, were categorical and not dependent on personal whims or desires. You should not lie under any circumstance. You should help people whether you want to or not. 4 pgs. 0 f/c. 1b. Pages: 4 Bibliography: 1 source(s) listed Filename: 1990 Utilitarian vs Kantian.doc Price: 35.80