In Jeremy Bentham's essay, he states that not only do people seek pleasure, but that they ought to seek it both for themselves and for the wider community. He presents us with the principle of utility, which is based on the premises that pain and pleasure alone points out what we shall do. To determine whether a action is right or wrong, we have to address the principle of utility, which approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever, according to the tendency which it appears to have to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question; or what is the same thing in other words, to promote or to oppose that happiness. Bentham says that it is in vain to talk of the interest of the community, without understanding what is the interest of an individual. An action then may be comfortable to the principle of utility, when the tendency it has to augment the happiness of the community is greater than any it has to diminish it. He claims that the words ought, right, and wrong have no meaning outside this structure of utility. Bentham presents us with the hedonistic calculus. This concludes whether an action is right or wrong. To a person considered by himself, the value of a pleasure or pain will be greater or less according to four things: its intensity, its duration, its certainty or uncertainty, and its propinquity or remoteness. But when the value of any pleasure or pain is considered for the purpose of estimating the tendency of any act by which it is produces, there are two other circumstances to be taken into the account: its fecundity, the chance it has of being followed by sensations of the same kind, and its purity, the chance that the sensation not being followed by sensations of the opposite kind. These six terms will determine the value of a pleasure or pain to a individual, but to a number of persons we must add its extent, which is the number of persons to whom the pleasure or pain extends. Bentham now out lines a formula to take an exact account of the general tendency of any act, by which the interest of a community is affected. First is to determine the value of each pleasure produced in the first instance. Second is to determine the value of each pain produced in first instance. The third step is to determine the value of each pleasure produced after the first (fecundity of the first pleasure and impurity of the first pain). The fourth step is to determine the value of each pain produced after the first (fecundity of the first pain and impurity of the first pleasure). The fifth step is to sum up all the values. If the balance is towards pleasure, it is good for the individual, if towards pain, it is bad. The final step is to take the number of concerned parties into account, sum up the values for each individual, and take the balance of the whole. If it leans towards pleasure it is good for the community, if towards pain, it is bad. Bentham doesn't expect us to go through this process every time we make a moral decision, but should always be kept in view. Bentham ends his arguments on the subject of motives. According to Bentham, actions are good or bad only on account of their effects: good, on account of their tendency to produce pleasure, or avert pain: bad, on account of their tendency to produce pain, or avert pleasure. In Kant's essay, he believes the only good thing in the world is a good will. He believes that nothing can be conceived in the world that can be called good without qualification, except a good will. He says that the gifts of nature are good and desirable in many respects, but these gifts may also be bad and mischievous if the will of the person is not good. The wealth and powerful are disclaimed unless they have a good will. A good will is not happiness, but the condition of even being worthy of happiness. He says that moderation in the affections and passions, self-control and calm deliberation, which are praised by the ancients as good without qualification, are actually not so, because a villain can practice self-control just as well as a good person. The most important point Kant makes is that a good will is good, not because of what it performs or affects, but simply by the virtue of the volition. For Kant, there is only one categorical imperative, which is to act only on that maxim whereby though canst at the same time will that it will become a universal law. Kant offers four examples. First, a man reduced to despair by misfortune who wishes to end his own life acts on the maxim: From self-love I adopt it as a principle to shorten my life when its longer duration is likely to bring more evil than satisfaction. If such a maxim were to become a universal law, we would live in a world in which people would end their lives by means of the very feeling whose special nature it is to impel to the improvement of life would contradict it self. Because this would be contradictory and impossible to adopt as a universal law, we can see that