E-LOGOS 2023, 30(2):71-82 | DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.501

Well-being in the Advent of Capitalism: Maximization of Utility against Categorical Imperative

Givheart C. Dano
Tangub City Global College, Philippines

In the modern capitalist society, the balance between promoting the well-being of the majority and respecting individual rights raises significant moral dilemmas. This paper explores two frameworks of morality: the maximization of utility and the categorical imperative. While the maximization of utility focuses on maximizing overall happiness and well-being, it may require sacrificing the well-being of a few individuals for the greater good. On the other hand, the categorical imperative emphasizes universal moral principles and the inherent dignity of individuals, prioritizing individual rights and justice. In the context of a capitalist society, the paper argues that the categorical imperative holds a more promising approach to well-being. It emphasizes the importance of respecting and protecting the inherent rights and dignity of individuals, ensuring fairness and equality. While capitalism can provide opportunities for economic growth and individual freedoms, it requires ethical considerations and regulations to ensure that it operates within a framework that upholds human rights. The tension between these frameworks challenges our perspectives on morality and highlights the complex ethical dilemmas that arise in a capitalist society. Ultimately, finding a balance between promoting well-being and respecting individual rights is crucial for creating a just and inclusive society within the capitalist framework.

Keywords: Capitalism, Categorical Imperative, Modern Society, Morality, Well-being

Received: November 20, 2023; Revised: November 20, 2023; Accepted: March 14, 2024; Prepublished online: March 14, 2024; Published: December 31, 2023  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Dano, G.C. (2023). Well-being in the Advent of Capitalism: Maximization of Utility against Categorical Imperative. E-LOGOS30(2), 71-82. doi: 10.18267/j.e-logos.501
Download citation

References

  1. Appiah, K. A. (2008). Experiments in ethics. Harvard University Press.
  2. Bentham, J. (1789). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. Clarendon Press. Go to original source...
  3. Butler, S. (2018). The Impact of Advanced Capitalism on Well-being: an Evidence-Informed Model. Human Arenas, 1(1), 58-70.
  4. Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking rights seriously. Harvard University Press.
  5. Fraser, N. (1997). Justice interruptus: Critical reflections on the "post socialist" condition. Routledge.
  6. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
  7. Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine.
  8. Harvey, D. (2010). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford University Press.
  9. Hayden Economics. (n.d.). Capitalism and Economic Freedom. Retrieved from https://www.rhayden.us/economic-concepts/capitalism-and-economic-freedom.html
  10. HEC Paris. (n.d.). How Can we Shape Capitalism to Increase Human Well-Being? Retrieved from https://www.hec.edu/en/knowledge/articles/how-can-we-shape-capitalism-increase-human-well-being
  11. Human Rights Pulse. (n.d.). Can Human Rights and Capitalism Ever Be Truly Compatible? Retrieved from https://www.humanrightspulse.com/mastercontentblog/can-human-rights-and-capitalism-ever-be-truly-compatible
  12. Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. Cambridge University Press.
  13. Kasser, T. (2002). The high price of materialism. MIT Press. Go to original source...
  14. Korsgaard, C. M. (1996). Creating the Kingdom of Ends: Reciprocity and Responsibility in Personal Relations. The Journal of Philosophy, 93(6), 279-302. Go to original source...
  15. Leiden Journal of International Law. (n.d.). Emancipating human rights: Capitalism and the common good. Retrieved from https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/leiden-journal-of-international-law/article/emancipating-human-rights-capitalism-and-the-common-good/8341B2BEE60C7BCD7BA9F99B850FD02A.
  16. MacAskill, W. (2020). The Case for Human Rights. In Ethics in the Real World (pp. 211-225). Penguin.
  17. Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn.
  18. Nussbaum, M. C. (2000). Women and human development: The capabilities approach. Cambridge University Press. Go to original source...
  19. Oxford Research Encyclopedias. (n.d.). The Expansion of Economic Freedom and the Capitalist Peace. Retrievedfromhttps://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-276
  20. Parlia. (n.d.). Capitalism and society both focus on freedom and opportunity. Retrieved from https://www.parlia.com/a/capitalism-society-focus-freedom-opportunity
  21. Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Harvard University Press. Go to original source...
  22. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press. Go to original source...
  23. Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist. Chelsea Green Publishing.
  24. Sandel, M. J. (2012). What money can't buy: The moral limits of markets. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
  25. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press.
  26. Singer, P. (1972). Famine, affluence, and morality. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 1(3), 229-243.
  27. Singer, P. (2011). Practical ethics. Cambridge University Press. Go to original source...
  28. Smith, A. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Go to original source...
  29. Stern, N. (2007). The economics of climate change: The Stern review. Cambridge University Press. Go to original source...
  30. Stiglitz, J. E. (2012). The Price of Inequality: How Today's Divided Society Endangers Our Future. W. W. Norton & Company.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.