Deontology Vs Utilitarianism Essay

Introduction
In this essay, I will be comparing Deontology to Utilitarianism. I will attempt to substantiate why I am justified in arguing that Deontology is a superior moral theory than Utilitarianism.

A Discussion of the Main Elements of Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is a moral theory developed by English philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1947 – 1832) and refined by fellow countryman John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873). It is a results-based concept that gives no weight to the intentions that drive actions but, rather, places emphasis on the consequences of such actions. With specific reference to Bentham’s Utilitarianism and his incorporation of Hedonistic Calculus, this theory is simply derived from human being’s primal desires to seek pleasure and restrict pain, and suggests that morally good actions are those which would accomplish such. Furthermore, the idea of striving to achieve ‘the greatest amount of good for the greatest number’ fuels an objection to this theory when considering the minority,

Utilitarianism’s consequence-driven ideology allows it to be manipulated to condone evidently immoral acts as appropriate if it benefits a majority group, as in the case of slavery (Anderson, 2004). Deontology, however, portrays all humans as equals and, thus, disregards immoral actions as a means to satisfy a majority. For example, the killing of a single man to aid several transplants would be justified by utility but is abolished by Deontology due to its irrational premises.

Conclusion
In this essay, I compared Utilitarianism and Deontology, and argued that Deontology is a better ethics system than Utilitarianism because, while Utilitarianism focuses solely on results, Deontology considers humans as more than just a means to an end and provides for a system of generally accepted