Utilitarianism Vs Universal Good

Utilitarian faces the issue of deciding between objective or universal good. An objective good would be one that is not tied to a particular human interest. A universal good is for all people at any given moment. The theory of Utilitarianism continues with a division into two different parts the first is hedonistic utilitarianism, which is the focus on if something is universally pleasurable to determine if something is good. Then there is preference utilitarianism, which is to try and satisfy as many singular people as possible.

In today’s society utilitarianism is viewed as one of the standards ways for common thinking and common reasoning. When it applies to environmental ethics the utilitarian view requires that we take into consideration

the pain and suffering of animals when searching for the greatest possible good of any environmental situation.
The final approach of ethics to be discussed is Deontology. The main concept to view within Deontology is the ideals of duties and rights. Deontology actually comes from the Greek word for duty. Eighteenth century philosopher Immanuel Kant wrote this theory.
The first major claim of this approach is how Kant believes we are all to be held responsible for only the things we can control.

Maxims, which this was called, on which we choose to act from free will. This principal in Kant’s view is the only thing that should be helping us make ethic decisions. We as people are ethical beings for the soul reason of being rational. When we act on any principal it doesn’t matter if it is a Maxims or not, people are still acting ethically.

Deontological thinking focuses on duties and rights. These duties and rights Is the primary value where we are expected to treat other people with respect, equality and freedom.

When looking at deontological ideas in the contemporary world we see that there is quite a lot of backlash claiming that there is no ethical basis to evaluate the choices made with this view. If someone wants an act badly enough they will start to justify their actions even if they aren’t truly justified but with no basis to evaluate them with there is no argument to say they are not justified. To use deontological logic for environmental politics and issues we could look at the use of constitutional protections of civil rights and civil liberties which can be viewed as respecting individual

autonomy.
Teleological, utilitarian, and deontological ideas of thinking are all very similar. They all have their own morals and ways of organizing thoughts but they are also all incredibly different from each other.
With Utilitarianism it is suggested that we only should full fill rights and duties to other people in the same way deontology suggest if it helps create the greatest good for the greatest number of people. This idea can create rights over powering social utility.
Environmental laws concerning endangered species have sparked debate between ideas of Utilitarianism and Deontology. The endangered species act is morally right in the eyes of Utilitarianism, with taking land from owners if there is an endangered species on the property, but goes completely against the thinking of Deontology. The deontology thinking would be that any individual who has legally bought and is owner of land has a right to the land no matter what other species may reside on the property. Some could comment that the Utilitarian view is similar to the teleological approach for the debate on