How does Kant’s ethics differ from utilitarianism?

Immanuel Kant’s ethics, known as deontological ethics, differs fundamentally from utilitarianism in its approach to moral worth and the evaluation of actions.1

The primary distinctions include:

• Consequences vs. Duty: Utilitarianism judges the morality of an action based on its consequences, aiming to maximize overall happiness or minimize suffering. In contrast, Kant argued that the rightness of an action depends entirely on whether it accords with a moral rule—a categorical imperative—regardless of the outcome.2341
• Motivation: For Kant, an action possesses moral worth only when performed out of duty for its own sake, rather than from desires, sympathetic feelings, or the pursuit of happiness. Utilitarians, conversely, often view human actions as motivated by the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain.13
• Universal Law: Kant’s supreme principle requires that one act only on maxims that can be willed as a universal law. While some utilitarians use "rule utilitarianism" to evaluate the general consequences of practices, Kantian ethics rejects sacrificing individual rights for the benefit of others, viewing each person as an end in themselves rather than a means to an end.14