Question

summarize the five ethical approaches

• Kant’s “Categorical Imperative”
• Mill’s application of the “principle of utility”
• al-Ashari and “divine command theory”

Answer 1

Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued that the supreme principle of morality is a standard of rationality that he dubbed the “Categorical Imperative” (CI). Kant characterized the CI as an objective, rationally necessary and unconditional principle that we must always follow despite any natural desires or inclinations we may have to the contrary. All specific moral requirements, according to Kant, are justified by this principle, which means that all immoral actions are irrational because they violate the CI.

Kant agreed with many of his predecessors that an analysis of practical reason reveals the requirement that rational agents must conform to instrumental principles. Yet he also argued that conformity to the CI (a non-instrumental principle), and hence to moral requirements themselves, can nevertheless be shown to be essential to rational agency. This argument was based on his striking doctrine that a rational will must be regarded as autonomous, or free, in the sense of being the author of the law that binds it. The fundamental principle of morality — the CI — is none other than the law of an autonomous will. Thus, at the heart of Kant’s moral philosophy is a conception of reason whose reach in practical affairs goes well beyond that of a Humean ‘slave’ to the passions. Moreover, it is the presence of this self-governing reason in each person that Kant thought offered decisive grounds for viewing each as possessed of equal worth and deserving of equal respect.

Mill’s principle of utility
Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness,” with happiness understood roughly as “pleasure and the absence of pain”.
Its simplest interpretation takes “tend” as referring to the causal tendencies of specific acts and hence their actual (vs. probable) consequences – though some say Mill later applies it to general rules or types of act.
Mill identifies the principle with Bentham’s “Greatest Happiness Principle,” understood as referring to total happiness (vs. the number of people made happy) and extending to all “sentient beings” (= beings capable of feeling pleasure or pain), including animals.
But unlike Bentham, Mill doesn’t take happiness just as a mathematical sum of pleasures minus pains, differing only on quantitative measures like intensity and duration. (Cf. Bentham’s “hedonic calculus.”)
Pleasures of distinctively human faculties are also said to be superior in quality to pleasures of the sort we share with animals – as determined by those who’ve experienced (and are still capable of experiencing) both sorts of pleasure.

Al-Ashari on Divine Command Theory
Al-Alsh’ari emphasizes especially God’s omnipotence (i.e., God’s absolute sovereignty and power)
He can do things that may sometimes surpass our understanding but we must accept them
nonetheless.
He can, for example, punish the faithful and reward the wicked by granting the latter admission to Paradise and sending the faithful to Hell.
Also, regarding some things that normally are considered good (such as the prohibition against lying, murder, theft, adultery, etc.), He has the power to make immoral. His power is absolute and subject to no one.