Q&A: The Result or the Act Itself
The Result or the Act Itself
Question
I happened to be looking into the difference between the moral principles of Kant on the one hand and Mill and Bentham on the other: is the act itself what matters most (Kant), or is it the result that matters (Mill’s utilitarianism)?
On that basis I wanted to ask: when it comes to commandments, is the act itself sacred, or is there no significance to the act apart from its result (and perhaps we would change certain things if they undermine that result)? And perhaps there is a distinction between different commandments; if so, what is the rule?
In addition, can this be tied to the dispute between Maimonides and the Maharal regarding the reasons for the commandments—that according to Maimonides all the commandments are for some benefit, whereas according to the Maharal the commandments are the King’s decree? If so, perhaps adopting one of these approaches would lead me to cope differently with the question of changing the commandments.
Thank you
Answer
There is no way to give a general answer about all the commandments. Even regarding specific commandments, the commentators do not agree. But this is not really connected to the dispute about utilitarianism. Kant fully agrees that there is benefit in moral action; he only argues that this should not be the motivation for performing it. On the other hand, Bentham and Mill hold that the definition of a moral act is determined by its consequences and the benefit it produces, but I very much doubt that they think intention in the action has no significance. If that is what they think, it is simply a mistake. Either way, it seems to me that there is no disagreement about the very existence of benefit in moral action (see column 122, where I explained that even according to Kant this is ultimately the way to achieve an optimal result), and if you project that onto Jewish law, then everyone comes out like Maimonides.
The same is true regarding the reasons for the commandments: I am not familiar with the Maharal you mention, but I very much doubt that in his view the commandments have no value or benefit. And of course, even according to Maimonides, intention in performing them is important and not only the result (this is explicit in several places in his writings).
In short, each of these two disputes—regarding the reasons for the commandments and regarding moral action—can be interpreted in different ways on different levels, so the connection between them is not necessary and probably not correct either.