The categorical imperative vs. the principle of utility

First I will be defending my case, and then I shall move on the rebuttals of my opponent’s case.Intrinsic GoodAn intrinsic good is something thats very nature itself is good, or worthwhile. Intrinsic goods are states of consciousness. [1] Happiness is a state of conscious which is good in nature and therefore is itself an intrinsic good. You can see this when you ask yourself the question “Why do I want to be happy?” It is self-explanatory. We want to be happy because the state of happiness is an intrinsic good.It also follows that things that bring about happiness bring about an intrinsic good. The actions that we take to arise at an intrinsic good are considered instrumental goods. For example, having an education will lead to a successful life and wealth, which leads to fulfillment, or happiness. If we act upon what is instrumentally good, we will be led to an intrinsic good. Anything that brings about a state of happiness or pleasure is bringing about an intrinsic good. ConsequencesMy opponent’s argument against this contention is that I have not shown proof of the intrinsic good of happiness. Since I have done this, this point is conceded.FF Supports PUMy opponent says that my contention here is a misunderstanding of the formulation. This is not the case. He says that anything that can not be universalized should not be acted upon. I already gave an example of this in my first round, which my opponent has not responded to. A person who risks his life to take a dangerous job in order to support his family would not be universally logical. If everyone took a high-risk job, many people would wind up injured, sick, or dead. However, it is a beneficial option for those in certain circumstances. Since this was not responded to, it can be conceded that there are beneficial actions that are not universal. In order for something to deny universality, it has to be negative on a worldwide scale. For example, being a rapist would bring about suffering to the victim. If everyone was a rapist, everyone would suffer. It should not be universal because the state of suffering is intrinsically bad. Therefore, we are using the PU to determine the FF.Now let’s move on to my opponents case.Premise 2 - Circular ReasoningMy opponent says that his case employs an example of a contradiction which affirms the truth of the FF; while saying that my refutation is flawed and therefore does not deny the truth of FF. He’s made a contradiction himself here.First, Pro says that lying would deny universal law because if everyone lied, no one would believe anything. Pro then says that if everyone told the truth, people could still find deception in things due to logic. He has applied logic to my example while not applying it to his own. If everyone lied, one could still use logic to determine what was truth. In fact, we can see that right in front of our faces. We live in a world where everyone lies; for someone to deny that would themselves be lying. Yet we still have the logical ability to determine a lie from the truth. Therefore, his case does not support how lying would fail due to it’s universal implications, and is simply relying on the FF for truth to make the case.Premise 1 & ConclusionMy opponent has not directly responded to these refutations, and said that his premise 2 supports them. Because his second premise is flawed, the rest of his argument falls to pieces and remain un-refuted. Extend the argument that the denial of argumentation does not extend to universality. Extend the argument that universalization is not necessarily a requisite for argumentation.ConclusionMy opponent has not shown a clear example of why someone should act only on universal laws; whereas I have shown a clear, un-refuted example of why one would act upon something that was not universal. Furthermore, I have shown how actions that we take can lead us to happiness or suffering, and acting upon the greatest amount of happiness is the most appropriate standard to a set of moral values. 1. http://philosophy.lander.edu...