Both philosophers Immanuel Kant and John Mill's theories, being, Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals and Utilitarianism respectively, provide strong arguments for their positions and are still both very influential in the philosophical realm today. John Mill's argument for utilitarianism is the stronger of the two since it argues a more found application of human character, whereas Kant argues more an assumption of human character. Mill's argument is based on known, while Kant attempts to create such known.
Kant's Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals argument sates that, there is only one thing that is intrinsically good without qualification, no matter whether conceived in earthly or heavenly context, thus being a good will. This good will can, "shine by its own light," with neither the possibility of adding nor taking away anything from its value. The environment then only allows one to work with it more conveniently or to bring attention to the good will.
Kant argues that with the absence of good will, gifts of nature such as talents of the mind or qualities of temperament along with gifts of fortune, although obviously good, may become evil and wrong if the will or character wielding these gifts is not itself good. Without good will, things like happiness are left with nothing to "correct" the influence of them on the mind, and to rectify the entire principle of acting and adapt it to its end. It is then said that those lacking good will but enjoying prosperity can never pass on pleasure to impartial rational spectators; and thus a good will is necessary for one to even be worthy of happiness. .
The idea of an objective principle, required for a will, is called a command, from the formula of the imperative, being the relation of an objective reason to a will. Yet the imperatives do not always coincide with the will. This is generally good, however what determines the will not by subjective causes but by means objectively (principles valid for every rational being).
