Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Difference between deontology and utilitarianism
Compare and contrast utilitarianism and deontology
Difference between deontology and utilitarianism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Difference between deontology and utilitarianism
Before we can get into comparing utilitarianism and deontology, first off we need to explain the very basis of each one. In Ethics there are many ethical theories and dilemmas, some which go hand in hand with each other and some that are in conflict with each other. Utilitarianism and Deontology are two very different ethical theories that are always in conflict with another, I will go into detail to explain both Deontology and Utilitarianism using the book “The Ethical Life” as well as “The Fundamentals of Ethics”.
There are two parts to Utilitarianism, Act and Rule utilitarianism also called extreme and restricted which according to J.J.C Smart “Extreme utilitarianism makes the morality of actions depend entirely on their results, requiring
…show more content…
77). In other words, Act utilitarianism the good or benefit one will receive the greatest amount of happiness which will only benefit the person or persons once making it the so called “act”. Rule utilitarianism all though very similar to Act utilitarianism is also somewhat very different, according to J.J.C Smart “by contrast, assesses the rightness of actions based on whether they adhere to rules that, if embraced by all, would yield optimal happiness (The Ethical Ife, Pg. 77). In other words, like I said is pretty much the same as act, but in this approach rule would produce the greatest amount of satisfaction or benefit for the more people who are related to the action being considered; for not only this one act but all other acts as well. All though very similar, something that might fall into Act utilitarianism may not fall under Rule utilitarianism, a good example of act and rule utility would be if someone were to cheat on …show more content…
Like Utilitarianism also has two parts to it, the two to parts to deontology are “The Good Will” and the “Categorical Imperative” are the main proponents to deontology. Immanuel Kant states that “The good will, is the only thing possessed of unconditional value: it is valuable it its own right, in every possible circumstance (The Ethical Life, Pg. 87). An example of “good will” is doing an action because you think it is good does not necessarily make that action that you are committing okay. My example would be killing somebody. If you kill someone in self-defense, you killed somebody in order to save your life that is an okay action on your part, but that still does not make killing
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that seeks to define right and wrong actions based solely on the consequences they produce. By utilitarian standards, an act is determined to be right if and only if it produces the greatest total amount of happiness for everyone. Happiness (or utility) is defined as the amount of pleasure less the amount of pain (Mill, 172). In order to act in accordance with utilitarianism, the agent must not only impartially attend to the pleasure of everyone, but they must also do so universally, meaning that everyone in the world is factored into the morality of the action.
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that states that an action is considered right as long as it promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. This theory was first proposed by Jeremy Bentham and later was refined by J.S Mill. Mill differs from Bentham by introducing a qualitative view on pleasure and makes a distinction between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. John Hospers critiques utilitarianism and shows that rule utilitarianism under more specific and stricter rules would promote utility better. Bernard Williams believes that utilitarianism is too demanding from people and instead believes virtue ethics is a better solution. Williams seems to have only considered act utilitarianism instead of rule utilitarianism, which may have better responses to the problems proposed by Williams. Sterling Hardwood purposes eleven objections to utilitarianism which can be used to help make compromise between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. I will argue that rule utilitarianism can be formed in such a way that it avoids the problems that arise from Williams, and Hardwood.
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
Deontology is when an action is considered morally good because of the action itself not the product of the action ("Deontological Ethics"). When applying Kant’s theory one also has to take into account the two aspects in determining what exactly the right thing in any situation is. They include universality and respect for persons. Universality states that you must “act only on that maxim which you can at the same time will to be a universal law”(Manias). Respect for person’s states that one must “act so that you treat humanity, weather in your own person or that of another; always as an end and never as a means only” (Manias). With this being said one must apply both of these to any option they are
The utilitarian faces many problems because he loses any ability to live a personal life. By this is meant that in making decisions the utilitarian must consider the steps which lead to the highest level of goodness in society. The utilitarian reaches for the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Two main aspects dominate the light of utilitarian beliefs. The consequentialist principle explains that in determining the rightness or wrongness of an act one must examine the results that will follow. The utility principle is that you can only deem something to be good if it in itself will bring upon a specific desired state, such as happiness or fulfillment. There are two types of utilitarians: Act utilitarians and Rule utilitarians. An act utilitarian believes that a person must think things through before making a decision. The only exception to this idea applies with rules of thumb; decisions that need to be made spontaneously. The right act is the one that results in the most utility. Rule utilitarians believe that an act is only deemed appropriate if it fits in line with the outline of valid rules within a system of rules that target the most favorable outcome.
“Utilitarianism is the creed which accepts as the foundations of morals utility of the greatest happiness principle holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” (Mil, 90). Utilitarianism ethics is based on the greatest good for the greatest number meaning that the moral agent does what he/she thinks will be
From a deontology perspective, it is believed its doing what is right because its right. It is not concerned necessarily with impacts or weighing out what might happen. It is simply stating something is right and proceeding to do it. The first argument for deontology is that it is universal and applies to everyone and everywhere at all times and we all have a sense of what is good or bad. An example
The main principle of utilitarianism is the greatest happiness principle. It states that, "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure" (Mill, 1863, Ch. 2, p330). In other words, it results with the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people that are involved.
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
Deontological moral theory is a Non-Consequentialist moral theory. While consequentialists believe the ends always justify the means, deontologists assert that the rightness of an action is not simply dependent on maximizing the good, if that action goes against what is considered moral. It is the inherent nature of the act alone that determines its ethical standing. For example, imagine a situation where there are four critical condition patients in a hospital who each need a different organ in order to survive. Then, a healthy man comes to the doctor’s office for a routine check-up.
Utilitarianism is defined as a theory asserting that the morally right action is the one that produces the most favorable balance of good over evil. There are two major types of utilitarianism: act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism. Act-utilitarianism asserts that the morally right action is the one that directly produces the most favorable balance of good or evil. A rule-utilitarianism asserts that the morally right action is the one covered by a rule that if generally followed would produce the most favorable balance of good over evil. The difference between act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism is that act-utilitarianism is the belief that it is fine to break a rule as long as it brings a greater good, while rule-utilitarianism
What I have found to be most interesting about both Deontology and Utilitarianism isn’t their approach to ethics, but rather their end goal. Deontology promotes “good will” as the ultimate good; it claims that each and every person has duties to respect others. On the other hand, Utilitarianism seeks to maximize general happiness. While these may sound rather similar at first glance (both ethical theories essentially center around treating people better), a deeper look reveals different motivations entirely. Deontology focuses on respecting the autonomy and humanity of others, basically preaching equal opportunity. Utilitarianism does not specify any means by which to obtain happiness—happiness is its only mandate. While happiness sounds like a great end goal, it is a rather impractical one and the lack of consideration of motivations and means of utility-increasing actions has some serious negative consequences. I prefer Deontology over Utilitarianism for its focus on individual’s rights, opportunity, and personal autonomy.
Utilitarianism was first established as an ethical way of processing thoughts into actions. Utilitarianism’s method of process was to consider the greatest good for the greatest number of people. However, many individuals found flaws within the utilitarian system. Thus, why deontology was created. Deontology’s method of process was to follow the rules and your duties no matter what the cost. However, yet again, many people discovered flaws within the system. Therefore, since the members of society can never agree upon an ethical way of thinking there always has to be complications. Although, both systems have now been adjusted to each individual’s mind set, there are consequences that came with both utilitarianism and deontology early on. Now, both utilitarianism and deontology are the basis of the way people in today’s society decipher situations.
A person could conclude from the information spoken of, that utilitarianism includes individuals who are consequentialists, and deontology include individuals who are nonconsequentialists. Meaning, consequentialists decide the rightness and wrongness of something by what the consequences entail. A nonconsequentialist perspective would be one as viewing the actions to be right or wrong based on the properties essential to that action, not any of the consequences. Deontology like any other ethical theory has strengths and weaknesses. A strength of deontology is the element that, in most circumstances, keeps individuals consistent. It does so in a way that a deontologist has certain duties and they are more than likely to perform them in the same way each time. Another strength according to Team Deadlock is the idea of supererogatory. Supererogatory indicated an act that is good but not morally required to be done (Team Deadlock) As an example, if an individual is stressed to the maximum and is ready to commit suicide but tells his best friend he would not do it under the circumstance that he helped him find a job and get his life on
Utilitarianism is defined to be “the view that right actions are those that result in the most beneficial balance of good over bad consequences for everyone involved” (Vaughn 64). In other words, for a utilitarian,