Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Utilitarianism compared to deontology
Utilitarianism compared to deontology
Kant views of morality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Utilitarianism compared to deontology
Do you think deontological ethics represents a strong theory? Why or why not? What is the danger of focusing on intentions as our moral guide? Do you think reason is objective and universal as Kant does? Explain.
Deontological ethics “judges the moral rightness or wrongness of an act in terms of the intrinsic moral value of the act itself.” (Lawland pg. 462). Listening to the lecture this week on deontological ethics, the only thing I could of think of was Robin Hood. Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor. Under, deontological ethics Robin Hood’s intentions are good., therefore, his actions should be morally correct. However, the categorical Imperative would disagree that it was morally right to steal because Robin Hood could not have convinced everyone to steal from the rich and give to the poor, it is against moral law. I
…show more content…
Just because we have the intent to do something, does not mean it will turn out as we expected or that we will be able to what is needed, when it is need. A few quotes that come to mind are “The road to hell is paved with good intentions” or “Hell is full of good meanings, but heaven is full of good works.” In reality, we should probably use our good intentions to work towards our moral obligations. As the quote states we can not only intend to be good, we must work towards goodness.
Immanuel Kant argued that “that morality is based neither on the principle of utility, nor on a law of nature, but on human reasons” (justiceharvard.org). I do not agree that reason is objective if anything I would say that reason is subjective. Humans are subjective, we are often lead to our personal feelings and our opinions. That and my opinions are not going to reflect my neighbor opinions, our “reason” could be completely different. If my “reasons” are subjective and differ from my neighbors “reasons” then it cannot be
Deontological ethics are those in which duty or obligation to do the right thing is based on God, tradition or an authority. Since John was a lawyer, he had to follow authority rules instead of doing what he believed was right. John Adams regarded his participation in the Boston Massacre as one of his finest hour as a lawyer. When come to upper class, John’s political philosophy was not a simple answer to explain because his philosophy can change throughout years as a lawyer.( Farrell, James, 233-49, 1991) As John’s ethic was deontological, he made the right critical decision that would be applied to everyone at that time, so he using the Kantian ethic during the Boston Massacre trial. Some people may did not agree with Adam’s decision to be the British troops, the law had to be followed in Adam and Quincy’s eyes. Adams felt like a rebel because he was defending the British troops and Sam Adams was against his choice to represent the troops at the Boston Massacre Trial. The most important part of the Boston Massacre was American saw how bad people was trying to take care of business by themselves instead of just walking away. By John defending the soldiers and doing his job the correct way, people realized that America needs to change their way of thinking and let someone else handle situations, who knows what they are doing. America’s ways would change slowly through the years to come, but America
Deontology diverges from consequentialism because deontology concentrates on the rightness or wrongness of the actions themselves instead of the consequences. There are different types of deontological theories. According to Kant, theoretical reasoning helps us discover what we should believe whereas the practical reasoning tells us what we should do. Morality falls under theoretical reasoning. In Kantian deontology, motives matter. Rather than consequences, it is the motive of an action makes that action morally right or wrong. Likewise, if an action intends to hurt someone, but eventually it benefits the other person, then it does not make that action morally right. All in all, deontology comes down to common-sense: whether it is a good action or a bad
The deontological view would be that we should act according to a set of rules, obligations, or duties that we must fulfil, unmindful of the consequences. Kant, a popular deontological philosopher of the 19th century, wrote in his “Foundations of Metaphysics of Morals”,
What is ethics? Ethics are the philosophical principles of good verses bad moral behavior. It is a guideline to help people make decisions or make a judgment calls. There are two main types of ethical principles that will be discussed in this paper, and how they are applied to the decision making process. They are Deontological and Utilitarian. Deontological ethics are based on the righteousness or wrongness of the action-taking place. It does not base itself on the bad or good consequences that come from the action. Immanuel Kant introduced deontological ethics in the 18th century. Kant believed that every decision or action made by a person had to be evaluated by his or her moral duty. He stated that humanity shouldn’t side on its
8- Alexander, Larry, Alexander,. "Deontological Ethics." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.)
German philosopher Immanuel Kant popularized the philosophy of deontology, which is described as actions that are based on obligation rather than personal gain or happiness (Rich & Butts, 2014). While developing his theory, Kant deemed two qualities that are essential for an action to be deemed an ethical. First, he believed it was never acceptable to sacrifice freedom of others to achieve a desired goal. In other words, he believed in equal respect for all humans. Each human has a right for freedom and justice, and if an action takes away the freedom of another, it is no longer ethical or morally correct. Secondly, he held that good will is most important, and that what is good is not determined by the outcome of the situation but by the action made (Johnson, 2008). In short, he simply meant that the consequences of a situation do not matter, only the intention of an action. Kant also declared that for an act to be considered morally correct, the act must be driven by duty alone. By extension, there could be no other motivation such as lo...
Deontology is an ethical theory concerned with duties and rights. The founder of deontological ethics was a German philosopher named Immanuel Kant. Kant’s deontological perspective implies people are sensitive to moral duties that require or prohibit certain behaviors, irrespective of the consequences (Tanner, Medin, & Iliev, 2008). The main focus of deontology is duty: deontology is derived from the Greek word deon, meaning duty. A duty is morally mandated action, for instance, the duty never to lie and always to keep your word. Based on Kant, even when individuals do not want to act on duty they are ethically obligated to do so (Rich, 2008).
Immanuel Kant’s theory of ethics is rooted in deontology. Describing Kant’s ethics as deontological means that they are derivative of mankind’s moral duty. For Kant, this critical component of ethics is an extension of Hume’s fork as it creates a third category, which is synthetic Apriori. This category is comprised of math, ethics and causality. His rules-based ethics revolves around the good will, as deontology in its nature revolves around adhering to the rules. Kant says that intelligence is great by nature, but means very little unless you apply them in virtuous and good will. In order for something to be truly good, it must be intrinsically good and without qualification.
Deontological ethics are “ethical theories that place special emphasis on the relationship between duty and the morality of human actions” (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2018). This viewpoint focuses more on the action itself rather than the outcome. Per Kant’s Categorical Imperative one should “so act that you treat humanity in your own person and in the person of everyone else always at the same time as an end and never merely as means” (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2018). An example of this is that killing is wrong, even if it is in self-defense. Many of the values and morals of the ELI Responsibilities Lens are based on the deontological
From that opinion, one may assert that morals themselves are not absolute. Still, deontological moral theory provides a strong base for making correct decisions. There are few realistic exceptions to the theory and one can easily notice when an exception is to be made. So, knowing that deontology creates a valuable beginning for a strong moral theory, one can simply interpret the theory less strictly.
Deontology in Immanuel Kant’s point of view is all about duty and not inclination of morality. For example, the First Proposition of Morality is an action that must be done from duty to have moral worth (298). In other words, if one were feeling generous and wanted to give money to the ones who really need it, this technically would not be moral worthy according to Kant. The reason why for this is because that person did not do it out of duty but instead out of free will. For one’s action to have moral worth, it could be an example of one going to work everyday. Everyone has their own specific job to do at work and that is their duty. All in all, Kant views that deontology must come from an action of duty in order for it to be moral worthy and it is not the consequences that determines what is right or wrong.
Deontology is the ethical view that some actions are morally forbidden or permitted regardless of consequences. One of the most influential deontological philosophers in history is Immanuel Kant who developed the idea of the Categorical Imperative. Kant believed that the only thing of intrinsic moral worth is a good will. Kant says in his work Morality and Rationality “The good will is not good because of what it affects or accomplishes or because of it’s adequacy to achieve some proposed end; it is good only because of it’s willing, i.e., it is good of itself”. A maxim is the generalized rule that characterizes the motives for a person’s actions. For Kant, a will that is good is one that is acting by the maxim of doing the right thing because it is right thing to do. The moral worth of an action is determined by whether or not it was acted upon out of respect for the moral law, or the Categorical Imperative. Imperatives in general imply something we ought to do however there is a distinction between categorical imperatives and hypothetical imperatives. Hypothetical imperatives are obligatory so long as we desire X. If we desire X we ought to do Y. However, categorical imperatives are not subject to conditions. The Categorical Imperative is universally binding to all rational creatures because they are rational. Kant proposes three formulations the Categorical Imperative in his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Moral, the Universal Law formulation, Humanity or End in Itself formulation, and Kingdom of Ends formulation. In this essay, the viablity of the Universal Law formulation is tested by discussing two objections to it, mainly the idea that the moral laws are too absolute and the existence of false positives and false negatives.
Immanuel Kant was a moral philosopher. His theory, better known as deontological theory, holds that intent, reason, rationality, and good will are motivating factors in the ethical decision making process. The purpose of this paper is to describe and explain major elements of his theory, its essential points, how it is used in the decision making process, and how it intersects with the teams values.
Deontology is the applied human behavior based on how people should act. Immanuel Kant is a philosopher who has evaluated the acts of morality. According to article titled "Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals" Immanuel Kant (2005) reads, "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” p. 11). Immanuel Kant 's quote draws applied reason for an obligation or a duty to the actions of human being 's behavior. Deontology brings clarity to one 's action in the treatment to gender equality that can reconstruct human growth and development in a social and economic structure through a simple act of
In philosophy, we often question what is ethical, what is moral, what is right and what is wrong based on several philosopher’s views. In this paper, I will examine the actions of Robin Hood through philosophical lenses, giving my opinion in regards which theory best judges and describes the effects of this significant figure. Robin Hood was an archer in a tale in the English folklore, who stole from the rich and gave money to the poor. Robin Hood is often a theme of discussion amongst scholars and other individuals interested in moral, ethics and philosophy since it raises several points that can be evaluated in regards judging if his actions were justifiable for the greater good.