Immanuel Kant and Thomas Aquinas Essay
Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website!
Immanuel Kant and Thomas Aquinas were two great philosophers who developed arguments for the existence of God and taught ways of critically assessing the natural world. They both believed that we all are born the same and learn through experience. You must first experience something in order to gain knowledge by experiencing it first. This meant that people could not be certain about something until they “saw” it first. They both believed in “free will” and that everyone could make their own choices but god had a plan that was ultimately the best.
Another similarity between Kant and Aquinas was their schooling and their profession after school. They both went through extensive schooling and ultimately became teachers. The biggest difference in the two was their belief in god. Kant believed in god but did not believe there was a way to prove his existence. Aquinas spent his life trying to prove there was a way to prove his existence.. Aquinas would make logical examples that make you understand where he was coming from.
“One of Thomas Aquinas’ examples begins with the idea that someone decides to build a house with deep foundations and solid supports.
Obviously, that person would begin by digging the foundation, but at some point, he or she would have to stop the digging process in order to actually erect the house. This implies that the hole for the supports would have to end somewhere in the earth. Likewise, creation must be traced back to a specific point that governs and explains existence. ” The most simple principle of Mills idea on utilitarianism is the greatest happiness principle, an action is right as long as it is maximizing utility. Everybody’s happiness is equal in a sense and counts as much as anyone else’s.
There are some things that we are forbidden to do to other people regardless of whether the loss of that individual’s utility would be made up by increases in other people’s utility. Utility is defines as happiness, but we all have our own perception on utility. For instance, I may find happiness in fishing, or sitting around and viewing nature, but someone else may find utility in doing sadistic acts like killing puppies. The Female genital mutilation video represents utilitarianism. It was not pleasurable or beneficial to the women getting “mutilated” but they were in a sense shunned if they were not mutilated.
A modern-day Robin Hood might increase society’s total utility, but theft is both legally and morally wrong. From a nature standpoint humans are the deciding factor in what has value. Where I may gain pleasure in hunting ducks, I’m sure that they are not gaining any type of value from me. Mill believed that utility “gave unity to my conception of things. I now had opinions: a creed, a doctrine, a philosophy; in one among the best senses of the word, a religion; the inculcation and diffusion of what could be made the principle outward purpose of a life. “