refering to kant and utilitarianism, whats more important an action's consequences or intention?

Answer 1

For the purpose of judging an individual I would say that is has to be intention. We all have unintended consequences of actions and it seems grossly unfair to blame people for these.

Take the simple act of giving someone new in town directions. Unkown to you (and there are no signs to "tip you off") the person is going to commit a crime at this particular location. Are you at fault? Do you stop giving people directions just in case? I would say no.

We cannot use consequences as a rule for behaviour simply because we cannot be sure of them. We can, of course, be sure of EXPECTED consequences, however this reduces to intentions: to embark on an act expecting bad consequences if prima-facae evidence of ill-will.

Answer 2

I'm not all that familiar with Kant; however, it seems to me that these are really one and the same, because our intentions, if sincere and morally justified, should be based upon our best reasonable expectations as to consequences. One should not do something without some expectation as to consequences.

Another way to look at this is from a legal angle. The courts in most parts of the world have properly determined that a person's guilt or innocence usually depend on both intentions and consequences. If a pharmacist accidentally puts poison in a bottle rather than medicine, he may be punished for negligence, but not murder. We should not consider just his intentions (and set him free with no penalty); nor should we consider just the consequences (and hang him for an unintentional accident).

Answer 3

It depends on what question you're asking. If I am trying to decide what to do - suppose I'm choosing among three options A, B and C - then naturally the likely consequences of my options are more important to consider than my intentions. Actually, I don't even know exactly what it would mean for me to think about my own intentions when I'm deciding what to do.

But if you are looking at another person and trying to decide whether they "did the right thing", then it isn't so clear. The consequences of their actions seem important, but not to the exclusion of other considerations. The consequences need, at least, to have been intended consequences and not mere accidents.

Finally, you might be looking at someone else and trying to decide whether they are a good person. In this case, I would say, they intentions or their character, is of paramount importance.

Answer 4

Because most see things at surface value, or from a "romantic" point of view, the action seems to hold more importance. Whereas fewer people view things beyond surface value, or from the "classic" point of view, the intent isn't brought to the forefront nearly as often. I try to look past the action, personally. But if you are speaking in general terms, my answer is the action is more important.

Answer 5

How are you measuring importance? To an individual, I suspect his or her intention was most important, but that intention has less impact on other people than the consequences do.

Answer 6

Gotta go with consequences, intention is just in the mind. Consequences are physical

Answer 7

I'm not feeling verbose in the slightest at the moment, therefore:

Consequence. Greatest good for the greatest number of people within the society. Intentions are meaningless here.

Answer 8

Consequences. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.