Kant

Kant and the utilitarians disagree about something fundamental: what makes an action right or wrong? Utilitarians say it’s all about consequences. An action is right if it produces the best overall outcome. Save ten lives by sacrificing one? Do it. The math works out. Kant says that’s backwards. What matters is your intention, your duty. Some actions are wrong regardless of their consequences. Don’t lie, even to save a life. Don’t use people as tools, even for a greater good....

Kant had a simple test for right and wrong. He called it the categorical imperative. Here’s how it works: before you do something, ask yourself what would happen if everyone did the same thing. Want to lie to get out of trouble? What if everyone lied when it was convenient? Trust would collapse. Society would break down. So lying fails the test. Want to break a promise because something better came up?...

Kant had a radical idea: some things are just wrong. Period. Not wrong because they lead to bad outcomes. Not wrong because they make people unhappy. Wrong because of what they are. Most ethical theories care about results. Utilitarianism says maximize happiness. Hedonism says pursue pleasure. But Kant said forget the consequences. Focus on the action itself. His example: lying is always wrong. Even if lying would save someone’s life, it’s still wrong to lie....