Quotation Philosopher Debate - Utilitarianism (pro) vs. Deontology (con)

I will present my quotations a little differently. Instead of pasting a wall of text, I will post many short quotes in order to sum up Kant's deontology.________________________________________________________________________________________________Starting Point - The intention (good will)'Nothing in the world—or out of it—can possibly be conceived that could be called ‘good’ without qualification except a good will.''courage, resoluteness and perseverance are doubtless in many ways good and desirable; but they can become extremely bad and harmful if the person’s character isn’t good''Even qualities that are conducive to this good will and can make its work easier have no intrinsic unconditional worth. We rightly hold them in high esteem, but only because we assume them to be accompanied by a good will; so we can’t take them to be absolutely -or unconditionally- good. ''The good will of this person would sparkle like a jewel all by itself, as something that had its full worth in itself.' 'What makes a good will good? It isn’t what it brings about, its usefulness in achieving some intended end. Rather, good will is good because of how it wills—i.e. it is good in itself.''The concept of a good will is present in the concept of duty' Duty'For an action to have genuine moral worth it must be done from duty.' 'An action that is done from duty doesn’t get its moral value from the purpose that’s to be achieved through it but from the maxim that it involves, giving the reason why the person acts thus.''the worth of character is brought out, which is morally the incomparably highest of all: he is beneficent not from preference but from duty.''To secure one’s own happiness is a duty (at least indirectly), because discontent with one’s condition—bundled along by many cares and unmet needs—could easily become a great temptation to transgress against duties. ''for this man, there still remains—as there does for everyone—the law that he ought to promote his happiness, not from wanting or liking but from duty. Only by following this can his conduct have true moral worth.' 'So the action’s moral value doesn’t depend on whether what is aimed at in it is actually achieved, but solely on the principle of the will from which the action is done, irrespective of anything the faculty of desire may be aiming at.''To have a duty is to be required to act in a certain way out of respect for law.'Universal Laws - categorical imperative'The objective principle is the practical law itself; it would also be the subjective principle for all rational beings if reason fully controlled the formation of preferences' 'Everything in nature works according to laws. Only a rational being has a will—which is the ability to act according to the thought of laws, i.e. to act on principle. To derive actions from laws you need reason, so that’s what will is— practical reason.''I ought never to act in such a way that I couldn’t also will that the maxim on which I act should be a universal law.''if the action is thought of as good in itself and hence as necessary in a will that conforms to reason... the imperative is categorical.''The categorical imperative, which declares the action to be objectively necessary without referring to any end in view''There is only one categorical imperative, and this is it: ·Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law·.''rational nature exists as an end in itself. Human beings necessarily think of their own existence in this way, which means that the principle holds as a subjective principle of human actions. But every other rational being also thinks of his existence on the same rational ground that holds also for myself; and so it is at the same time an objective principle''Act in such a way as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of anyone else, always as an end and never merely as a means''The third practical principle of the will, as the supreme condition of its harmony with universal practical reason, namely, the idea of the will of every rational being as a will laying down universal law' 'By this third principle, any maxim is rejected if it isn’t consistent with the will’s role as a giver of universal law. Hence the will is not merely subject to the law, but subject to it in such a way that it must be viewed as prescribing the law to itself, and for just that reason as being subject to the law, the law of which it sees itself as the author' ________________________________________________________________________________________________I will leave it for now, and wait to hear Pro's reply.