Hall of Infinite Doors
Kant, Mill, and Nietzsche's approaches to moral theory can be viewed on a spectrum or as an evolution (or devolution depending on one's perception) of moral philosophies. This spectrum starts at Kantian ethics them moves to rule utilitarianism then to act utilitarianism and finally to Nietzsche's moral theory. Along this progression, absolute rules of morality are reduced until Nietzsche's philosophy in which no absolutes exist.
Kant's non-consequentialist approach to moral theory is at the beginning of the progression. This moral theory built off of ideal maxims that are univerisilizable and judges intentions of actions rather than the ultimate consequences of the actions. Kant espouses the idea that there are "perfect duties" which are universilizable moral laws based on reason. These laws must apply to every individual in every situation under Kant's categorical imperative. In order for actions to be perfectly moral they must be committed only for the sake of upholding these maxims.
Utilitarianism comes next, more specifically, rule utilitarianism. This differs from Kantian ethics in that it is consequentialist. Instead of an action's correctness being based off the good will involved with the intention of an action, it is determined by the increase in overall utility of humanity due to the action. Rule utilitarianism uses rules that are similar to maxims but not as strict. These rules are established because humans cannot accurately predict the consequences of their actions and it is believed that these rules will maximize utility for humanity if they are followed. Those who follow act utilitarianism recognize that there are missed opportunities for utility to be maximized when rules are followed because all rules have exceptions. They instead try to maximize utility by evaluating each situation independently and trying to determine which action will have the highest likelihood of increasing overall happiness.
Act utilitarianism has only one absolute moral rule: actions should increase overall utility (happiness). Nietzsche's concept of morality strips away the final absolute concept in the progression of moral theories. Nietzsche views morality has purely a human construct that changes depending on the powers that be. He denies any transcendental background to morality and shows how various moral concepts have evolved and changed throughout history. He goes on to describe how before the spread of Christianity, the concept of morality was created by those who were in power, the nobility. They had the power over what words meant and therefore could define good and evil. Jesus started a movement which ultimately switched the definitions of good and evil. Where the noble had originally described strength and power as good, Christianity held that meekness and humility were good and this aggressive strength was evil. The fact that a moral system can change based on which ever will predominates in society proves that there is no absolute morality. An absolute morality would persist regardless of whatever will dominate society. This greatly differs from Kantian ethics which holds that all maxims are universilizable and therefore absolute and differs from utilitarianism which holds that morality is always increasing overall happiness. Nietzsche shows throughout history a struggle between various forces of will of how to define morality. No universal morality can ever encompass humanity.
Kant's non-consequentialist approach to moral theory is at the beginning of the progression. This moral theory built off of ideal maxims that are univerisilizable and judges intentions of actions rather than the ultimate consequences of the actions. Kant espouses the idea that there are "perfect duties" which are universilizable moral laws based on reason. These laws must apply to every individual in every situation under Kant's categorical imperative. In order for actions to be perfectly moral they must be committed only for the sake of upholding these maxims.
Utilitarianism comes next, more specifically, rule utilitarianism. This differs from Kantian ethics in that it is consequentialist. Instead of an action's correctness being based off the good will involved with the intention of an action, it is determined by the increase in overall utility of humanity due to the action. Rule utilitarianism uses rules that are similar to maxims but not as strict. These rules are established because humans cannot accurately predict the consequences of their actions and it is believed that these rules will maximize utility for humanity if they are followed. Those who follow act utilitarianism recognize that there are missed opportunities for utility to be maximized when rules are followed because all rules have exceptions. They instead try to maximize utility by evaluating each situation independently and trying to determine which action will have the highest likelihood of increasing overall happiness.
Act utilitarianism has only one absolute moral rule: actions should increase overall utility (happiness). Nietzsche's concept of morality strips away the final absolute concept in the progression of moral theories. Nietzsche views morality has purely a human construct that changes depending on the powers that be. He denies any transcendental background to morality and shows how various moral concepts have evolved and changed throughout history. He goes on to describe how before the spread of Christianity, the concept of morality was created by those who were in power, the nobility. They had the power over what words meant and therefore could define good and evil. Jesus started a movement which ultimately switched the definitions of good and evil. Where the noble had originally described strength and power as good, Christianity held that meekness and humility were good and this aggressive strength was evil. The fact that a moral system can change based on which ever will predominates in society proves that there is no absolute morality. An absolute morality would persist regardless of whatever will dominate society. This greatly differs from Kantian ethics which holds that all maxims are universilizable and therefore absolute and differs from utilitarianism which holds that morality is always increasing overall happiness. Nietzsche shows throughout history a struggle between various forces of will of how to define morality. No universal morality can ever encompass humanity.