More handpicked essays just for you.
Similarities of deontology vs consequentialism
Important ethical dilemmas
Ethical dilemmas and responsibilities
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Similarities of deontology vs consequentialism
Consequentialism and deontology are two different theories concerning with morality. Consequentialism believes in the concept of the end justifies the means. On the other hand, deontology does not believe in the concept of the ends justifies the means. It believes that right actions are defined by duty. Deontology is the opposite of consequentialism when it comes to moral ethics, making it the better approach.
Deontology is a non-consequentialist theory. While consequentialism believes the ends always justify the means, deontologists claim that the rightness of an action should not be solely dependent on maximizing the good, even if that action goes against what is ethically right. For example, four critical conditioned patients in a hospital need a different organ to survive and a healthy man comes into the hospital for a check-up, would you kill the healthy man to save the four? According to consequentialism, the doctor should take the healthy man’s organs to save the others, thus maximizing the good. However, we all know that it is ethically wrong. Deontology objects to this way o...
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).
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
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
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.
In conclusion we can say that consequentialism is flawed in the fact that the borders of a wrongdoing, to bring about a better good, are limitless. We can conclude that evil wrong doing can be construed as bringing about a better happiness for what the evil doer contrives to be for the better good of the people. For the most part we have seen that deontology’s view of good will in the individuals act can lead to moral justification. The captain and his men must make this moral decision to kill or not, if they do kill the Indians, their actions must be left to higher authority to deal with.
A deontologist believes that irrespective of consequences some acts are deemed intrinsically wrong (Flanagan, 2016b). Kant (Flanagan, 2016b) offers the following “act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law”. Therefore, morality is determined by the principle of the action, rather than the action itself. From a deontological stance to cause “unnecessary suffering” is intrinsically wrong, thus animals as morally innocent, vulnerable and being able to feel pain (Linzey, 2013; Rollin, 2011) are owed moral obligations. Furthermore, “ a morally considerable being is a being who can be wronged in a morally relevant sense” (Gruen, 2014). Therefore, discussion of animal vivisection in
Stocker believes that mainstream ethical theories, like consequentialism and deontology, make it impossible for people to reconcile their reasons and motives because these theories demand that people perform acts for the sake of duty or for the good, as opposed to because they care about the people who are affected by their actions.
When faced with the decision of whether or not to kill ones self, the deontological thinker would argue using the categorical imperative, saying that in order to act morally one must do as if their actions were to become universal law. If this is the case then making the decision to end ones own life is egregiously immoral because by doing so the person would be forcing all other rational beings to do the same. However a consequentialist would state that if the person is causing more pain and suffering to themselves and those around them alive than they would dead, then it would be beneficial to the world as whole for them to complete the action.
Furthermore, deontology doesn’t deal solely with the purposes in a traditional sense but dealing with duties and obligations. Many of us have duties or obligations regarding our activities that centered on our beliefs and values. For example, a doctor just received a phone call that his family had an accident and killed by a drunk driver. That drunk driver ends up in the operating room, and the doctor, whose family just died needs to operate the drunk driver. Would the doctor perform the operation or not?
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
Deontology, on the other hand, emphasizes on the moral intuitions that guide one’s conscience for or against certain actions (Curcă, 2013). Deontologists are the opposites of utilitarians because the essential judgment of taking or not taking a course of action is observed in its strictest sense. Apart from feelings and conditions, deontologists also consider the consequences of not following religious rules and natural laws of morality to guide every course of action. Thus, deontologists value three major principles of decision-making: intrinsic morality, the duty of care, and the moral consequences of an action.
To become a well- respected and trustworthy practitioner we have to be aware of how we deal with media and portray our clientele. Even though you may view something as ethical someone else may disagree, which could be the result of the person having a deontological or a consequentialist ethical view. Even though there is a list of ethical views I wanted to focus on two, in particular, deontology and consequentialism. Deontology and Consequentialism can be extremely similar philosophical views as they focus on doing the greater good. However, both contain key factors that make each idea unique and different. It could be said that both theories arrive at the same conclusion but through the way of different paths. Though, beyond the surface each of these ethical ideologies, they begin to differ
A nonconsequentialist act is the deontology theory. Deontology is a moral obligation or duty to act relating to a principle or rule. Deontology requires the act of humanity. It is never the treatment as a means to an end. A rule of deontology is that one should act in a manner that maxim the act intending to develop the act as a universal law. However, deontology can obligate someone to act in a way that seems wrong and unethical (Mossier, 2013). It is a rigid theory that fails to capture the complex issues that arise. Therefore, one would need to act as everyone would act in that specific situation. When applying the deontology theory, one should focus on the will of the person acting, the person’s intention of carrying out the act, and the rule according to which the act is carried out. Deontology can impact human life within society through the application to the principal in gender equality in areas of employment, health care, and the education system. The
A deontologist asserts that you should do your duty even if you or others suffer as a consequence. Deontology is seen as an obligation to protect regardless of the impact it has on others, whether it be people, animals, and/or the environment and so on. “Deontology focuses on the duties and obligations one has in carrying out actions rather than on the consequences of those actions” (Mosser, 2013). According to deontologist Immanuel Kant, when doing your duty as a deontologist there are “categorical imperatives” that should be followed. In other words there are exceptions for why one is not taking action. “All imperatives command either hypothetically or categorically” (Kant,
Ethics is a system of moral principles and a branch of philosophy which defines what is acceptable for both individuals and society. It is a philosophy that covers a whole range of things that have an importance in everyday situations. Ethics are vital in everyones lives, it includes human values, and how to have a good life, our rights and responsibilities, moral decisions what is right and wrong, good and bad. Moral principles affect how people make decisions and lead their lives (BBC, 2013). There are many different beliefs about were ethics come from. These consist of; God and Religion, human conscience, the example of good human beings and a huge desire for the best for people in each unique situation, and political power (BBC, 2013).