Pros And Cons Of Deontology

While applying the principles of deontological ethics in general and reason based ethics in particular, all actions contain moral value, regardless of the actual nature of the actions. The New Orleans levee network was still a manifestation of good intention, according to deontological ethics. Even if the levees failed to protect the city from flood, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers need to work harder in order to avoid similar mistakes in the future. Nevertheless, engineers are obliged to update the levee network, taking into account the duty based ethics that implies the duty to act out of moral laws. The duty based ethics, unlike reason based ethics, correlate the hierarchy of moral principles and laws on the one hand and array of actions on the other hand. The duty based ethics impose additional context on action and motivation to act, unlike reason based

Hence, a police officer’s duty then is to do the right act as approved by moral standards. Therefore, deontological ethics are duty based. Non-consequentialist ethics are divided into two standpoints; act non-consequentialism and rule non-consequentialism.

Deontological theories put the prominence on the character itself, and not on its effects. The right or wrong of an action is the intrinsic spirit of an action. When the principle of an action can be universalized, the action is good. So, some actions are always good or wrong, no matter what the consequences are. Examples of

2) Deontology, on the contrary, describes two types of ethical imperatives. First, a hypothetical imperative and other categorical imperative. Both these tell to be morally correct but prior is done to create a win-win situation, by establishing a good relationship which could be helpful in the future and the latter tells to make an action which is morally correct no matter what the consequences be, good or

Deontology and Utilitarianism are similar in that the tenets of each aims at promoting the well-being of others by doing good. However, there are several differences between Deontology and Utilitarianism. Deontology focuses on the moral intention of an act. Utilitarianism focuses on the consequences of an action. Deontological approaches focus on the morality of an action on an individual basis. Utilitarian approaches attempt to achieve the greatest good for the greatest amount of

The concept of ethics entails systemizing, justifying, and recommending right and wrong conduct. It involves in practical reasoning: good, right, duty, obligation, virtue, freedom, rationality, and choice. Humanity has questioned this concept of ethics and ‘good’ for as long as it has survived, as it deals with real-life issues such as “what is morally right and wrong?” and “how do people ought to act?” Such ethical dilemmas can be found in people’s everyday lives, and although appears to be a straightforward question, there is much debate over which standard of behavior people should abide to when responding to certain situations, and determining what is morally right or wrong.

The distinction between right and wrong has been a matter of discussion for centuries, whether expressed through philosophical essays, social organisation or artistic creation. Deontological ethics is a philosophical theory which dissects acts into right and wrong on the basis of the adherence of an act to a specific rule. One of the many formulations of deontology is Kantianism, a view introduced by Immanuel Kant, which argues that the basis for morality are motives for one’s action rather than the consequences of it and searches a justification for one’s duty to behave in a certain manner. One of the critiques or counter positions of Kant’s ethics is Sartrean existentialism as it denies the possibility of an absolute moral system and focuses on the individual morality rather than social one and bases on one’s commitment to his chosen values. Yet drawing parallels between the two positions is far from impossible, despite Sartre’s strong opposition to Kantian moral theory.

The theory of deontology states we are morally obligated to act in accordance with obvious set of principles and rules regardless of results. Deontological ethics focuses on duties, and rights. The term deontological was coined by the utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham, who described it as “knowledge of what is right or proper” Bentham thought that deontology points in the direction of principle of utility. But contemporary philosophers use the term deontological to indicate a contrast with the utilitarian focus on the consequences of action. Instead of focusing on consequences, deontological ethics focus on duties and obligation: things we ought to do regardless of the consequences. While utilitarian ethics focuses on producing the greatest happiness for the greatest number, deontological ethics focuses on what makes us worthy of happiness. For Kant, as for the Stocis and other who emphasize duty, we are worthy of happiness only when we do our duty. As Kant explained, morality “is not properly the doctrine of how we are to make ourselves happy but of how we are to become worthy of happiness.” For Kant, morality is not a “doctrine of happiness” or set of instructions on how to become happy. Rather, morality is the “rational condition of happiness”

According to the American Nurses Association, Deontology, an ethical theory founded by Immanuel Kant, applies judgments based on the underlying morality, or the rightness or wrongness of an action. It is based upon adherence to rules. The driving factor of decisions are evaluated through the intentions rather than the outcomes. Actions are classified into categories. Two of the most outstanding ones include universal law of humanity (categorical imperative) and principle of ends, which perceives that actions should be based in the end and never merely as a means (2011).

Imagine yourself on the sidelines of The Peach Bowl as you watch your team in the final quarter of the game. The score is 28-24 with the lead going to the opposing team. The fans are screaming and your adrenaline is high. On the current play, you see the starting quarterback take a hard hit straight to his head. He walks off the field and the head coach points him in your direction. You are the team physician. Upon examination you determine he has a severe concussion and is unfit to return to play. You know that another hit on top of his current concussion could lead to a very serious brain injury. You tell the player and the head coach this information but they are both adamant that he is okay and that he needs to get back on the field. If

Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill are two of the most notable philosophers in normative ethics. This branch of ethics is based on moral standards that determine what is considered morally right and wrong. This paper will focus on Immanuel Kant’s theory of deontology and J.S. Mill’s theory of utilitarianism. While Mill takes a consequentialist approach, focused on the belief that actions are right if they are for the benefit of a majority, Kant is solely concerned with the nature of duty and obligation, regardless of the outcome. This paper will also reveal that Kantian ethics, in my opinion, is a better moral law to follow compared to the utilitarian position.

The divine command theory, utilitarianism, Kant’s duty defined morality, natural law theory, and Aristotle’s virtue ethics are the five types of ethical theories. The divine command theory states that what is morally right and wrong will be decided by God. Utilitarianism states that “Action “A” is morally right if and only if it produces the greatest amount of overall happiness. Kant’s duty defined morality states that what is important is acting for the sake of producing good consequences, no matter what the act is. Natural law theory states that people should focus on the good and avoid any evil. The last theory is Aristotle’s virtue ethics which states that we should move from the concern towards good action and to focus on the concern with good character. This paper argues that Aristotle’s virtue ethics is better than the other ethical theories.

First we must understand what is Deontology. The word deontology when broken down to its roots literally means, the study of the nature of duty and obligation. Just the word alone is a great summary of what this philosophy deals with. Kant, the German philosopher who developed deontology, taught that the highest good one could achieve is that of good will. However to achieve this highest good one must be motivated only by a duty or

A limitation of Deontology stems from the fact that it is so strict on how one should or should not act, but yet humans need clearly defined laws to serve as guides. Although laws are not followed one hundred percent of the time, the mere fact that there are laws telling us what is right or wrong result in a higher success of people acting morally good because there is a strict guide of how to act and how not to act. Yet Deontology provides a strong ethical framework that enables moral agents to act in such a way that is towards good will and ethically correct

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.