Final answer:
Immanuel Kant and Sir William David Ross are two philosophers who opposed utilitarianism. Kant's deontological ethics focus on absolute moral duties rather than the consequences of actions, contrary to utilitarianism's focus on outcomes. Ross offered a pluralistic view recognizing competing moral obligations.
Step-by-step explanation:
Who Opposed Utilitarianism?
Philosopher Immanuel Kant is notable for opposing the idea of utilitarianism. He believed that certain actions such as murder, theft, and lying are intrinsically wrong and always prohibited, regardless of the consequences they might produce. Kant's ethical theory, known as deontology, holds that the morality of an action is based on whether it accords with moral laws or duties, which are absolute and universally applicable, rather than its outcomes. This is in contrast to the utilitarian view that judges the morality of an action by its consequences, specifically, whether it maximizes happiness or pleasure for the greatest number of people.
Kant's approach is grounded in what he calls the Categorical Imperative, which is a principle that acts as a universal moral law. One formulation of this imperative is to act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law. This means that one should only do something if they would be willing for everyone else to do it in the same situation.
Sir William David Ross is another philosopher who critiqued utilitarianism. He proposed a theory of prima facie duties, which recognizes various moral obligations that can be considered binding unless they conflict with a more pressing obligation. Ross's pluralistic approach addresses the complex nature of moral decision-making, differentiating it from the simpler form of utilitarianism presented by philosophers like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill.