Discourse Ethics, Kant and Utilitarianism | universalizing maxims, consequences, practical discourse, theory comparison | Philosophy Unit | Grades 11–12

Discourse Ethics, Kant and Utilitarianism is a complete ethics unit for grades 11–12 that asks one question: what reasons make a rule morally defensible? It comes as a 32-page student book and a 20-page teacher guide, plus an editable Word text edition. Over four 90-minute lessons, students test maxims for universalizability, assess consequences impartially, examine the assent of all affected in practical discourse, and finally apply all three approaches to the same case. The unit is careful not to reduce Kant to rigid rules, utilitarianism to majority interests, or Habermas to voting.

The cases are short and concrete. A group promises to repay a loan it knows it will never repay, to fund a useful school project. A project brings a small benefit to 100 people while severely burdening two, and a yes-or-no vote never captured how heavy those burdens are. Adults alone decide a school rule that mainly affects students and cleaning staff, and leadership says it has already considered their interests. In the last lesson, a school considers a compulsory app that simplifies organization but collects more data than necessary and is hard for some families to access. Students build a separate argument for each theory and then decide which is most persuasive and what objection remains.

What's Included

• 32-page student book (PDF, A4): four five-page lessons (explanation, case material, workshop, judgment, extension), a concept page, two practice assessments with writing plans, a jigsaw page, a portfolio page and a self-check
• 20-page teacher guide (PDF): aims, sequence planning, differentiation, minute-by-minute lesson plans, expected reasoning for every task and feedback pages for each lesson
• Four original teaching cases (M1–M4), each with an analytical task, a workshop task, a debate question and a worked reasoning example
• Two original practice assessments with 100-point marking guidance: reconstruction 25, analysis and comparison 40, judgment 25, communication 10
• Concept page defining maxim, universalization, utility and affected parties
• Editable Word text edition (its own pagination) for adapting tasks
• Cover thumbnail, A4 page preview and the unit's AI illustration as image files
• Source list and AI disclosure on the final page of the teacher guide

Four Lessons

1. Kant and the maxim — Student book pp. 3–7. Students formulate the maxim behind a knowingly false promise and test what universalizing it does to promising. Workshop: design an honest funding alternative and explain the normative difference.
2. Utilitarian assessment of consequences — Student book pp. 8–12. A small benefit for 100 people against a severe burden for two. Students identify what an impartial assessment still needs (intensity, duration, likelihood, alternatives) and build a qualitative consequence matrix without inventing utility values.
3. Habermas and practical discourse — Student book pp. 13–17. The difference between assuming other people's interests and letting them take part. Students design a process with accessible information and reasoned examination of objections.
4. Three approaches to the same case — Student book pp. 18–22. The compulsory school app case. Students write a distinct argument for each theory and fill in a table of criterion, application, conclusion and uncertainty.
5. Practice assessments and jigsaw — Student book pp. 23–32. Two original assessment texts with tasks and writing plans, a four-perspective jigsaw that ends in a shared concept map, a portfolio page and a self-check.

Students Will Learn To

• Formulate a maxim and test whether it can be willed as a universal law, including the humanity formulation
• Explain why a simple majority of satisfied people is not a complete utilitarian assessment
• Distinguish assuming the interests of those affected from enabling their participation in discourse
• Apply kantian, utilitarian and discourse-ethical reasoning to the same case and show where the reasons differ even when the conclusions agree
• Write a qualified judgment on which theory is most persuasive in a case and answer a serious objection

Perfect For

• Grade 11–12 ethics and philosophy courses that cover normative theories
• Teachers who want a direct comparison of three theories on identical cases
• Mixed-ability classes, using the Support 1 and Support 2 prompts printed under every case
• Practice in extended argumentative writing with a transparent marking scheme
• Roughly maps to the moral philosophy part of UK A Level Philosophy (Years 12–13), senior secondary philosophy and ethics in Australia (Years 11–12) and IB Diploma Philosophy

Why Teachers Choose This Unit

• Expected reasoning for every A, B and C task in the teacher guide, written as criteria to look for rather than one fixed answer.
• A timed plan for each 90-minute lesson: opening (0–10), exploration (10–30), analysis (30–55), experiment (55–75) and consolidation (75–90).
• Two support levels on every case page: Support 1 starts with two observations and one justified connection, Support 2 asks for an alternative explanation and the information that would decide between them.
• The marking guidance for Practice 1 shows how to examine each appeal separately: a vote count is neither a maxim test, a complete welfare assessment nor ideal consensus.
• All cases and assessment texts are original, and the philosophical explanations are original paraphrases, so students cannot look the answers up.

Save with the bundle: this unit is part of the Habermas & Ethics Bundle — all four philosophy units for $49.90 instead of $99.96. All 24 upper-secondary units are in Upper Secondary Complete for $149.90.

Created with AI assistance: ChatGPT (OpenAI) and Claude (Anthropic). Illustrations were generated with OpenAI image generation as discussion prompts; they are not photographs. Edited for classroom use before publication. Sources and the full AI note are on the final teacher guide page.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which courses and exams does this unit fit?

It fits grade 11–12 ethics and philosophy courses and roughly maps to the moral philosophy content of UK A Level Philosophy (Years 12–13), senior secondary philosophy and ethics in Australia (Years 11–12) and IB Diploma Philosophy. It has no official endorsement from the College Board, the IB, any UK exam board, ACARA or any state education department. The unit was originally developed for German upper-secondary philosophy courses, and the English edition is a full parallel version.

How long does it take?

The core is four 90-minute lessons, one for each section of the student book. The teacher guide notes that the workshop and extension pages may need extra time. Plan 45–60 minutes for the jigsaw and 90–135 minutes for each of the two practice assessments. Four double lessons do not cover every activity, so you can choose the cases and tasks that suit your class.

Does the unit present one theory as the correct one?

No. The final debate question asks which theory is most persuasive in the school app case and what objection remains, and different positions are accepted if they use explicit criteria, evidence and a serious opposing view. The marking guidance states that no particular opinion is required. The unit also points out that theories can reach the same conclusion for different reasons, so students compare the reasoning as well as the verdicts.

How is it delivered?

Instant digital download after purchase. You receive the student book and teacher guide as A4 PDFs, which print on US Letter with fit-to-page, plus the editable Word text edition and the image files. For graded use, the teacher guide recommends handing out only the source material and tasks and keeping the teacher guide and worked examples separate.