Euthanasia and Ethics: Kant and Stewart Mill

The problem of euthanasia is a controversial matter. Here we will look at the discussion on euthanasia of Emmanuel Kant and John Stewart Mill and the moral system of how each philosopher responds to this discussion. Because Emmanuel Kant and John Stewart Mill have different ethics, they treat euthanasia in a different way. Immanuel Kant holds morality in morality or duty theory. This means that for those with moral value it must be done from responsibility. Kant explains that the basis for this view is absolute, "It is based solely on the saying that you can make it a universal law at the same time" (412).

John Stuartmir's "practical" ethical theory and Immanuel Kant's "sorting order" ethical theory. According to utilitarianism, euthanasia is morally justified, and according to Kantism, euthanasia is morally irrational; however, I lead these two positions to their particular position Argued that it is due to a large defect inherent in inference. There is no suitable solution to this problem. According to Utilitarianism, morality is mainly of the kind ... the theory behind Utilitarianism is that if the it does not promote happiness or joy, the behavior of a person that it is wrong promotes happiness and happiness This is the case. The point of this theory is the principle of utility, "maximum happiness to the people who should be the most". (Palmer) Jeremy Bentham basically brought it to the name of Utilitarianism. I pay more attention than those before him

The fundamental principles of John Mill's utilitarianism and Emanuel Kant's moral metaphysics suggest different views of the two philosophers about the field of moral philosophy. Compared to Kant 's metaphysical segmentation and its use in proof of validity and error, Mill' s utilitarianism is a more sophisticated ethical theory. Kant takes his confirmation of metaphysical survival as discipline of his moral philosophy. If the law has moral power it will be the foundation.