The ethical approaches of Kant and Mill are often contrasted the first as an approach that takes right and duty (our obligations to others) as the fundamental categories, while the latter takes the good (what is overall desirable) as the fundamental category. For this reason, Kantian morality is taken as an instance of a deontological theory one emphasizing duty and our obligations while utilitarianism is taken as an instance of a teleological one focused on the goal or end of action. Using at least two specific examples of situations from your own experience, discuss the contrast between the two ethical approaches by applying the basic principle of each theory to your two examples and clarify if and how they yield different recommendations for action in the two cases.
Discuss the differences between how Charles Mills addresses white supremacy in his article of that title and how Marilyn Frye analyzes sexism in her article about it. Present an account in your own words of how each focuses beyond individuals subjective attitudes and false beliefs to identify specific practices and institutions that enable and extend the power of unjust social arrangements. Then consider an incident or situation in current events that might fit into the analysis each theorist gives of the two structures of injustice, and show how each of your two examples either illustrates or muddies the analysis given by the two theorists.